or add our feed URL to your podcast app of choice!
Having a content strategy is more than just writing a few sequences or cadences and uploading them to your SEP.
These two frenemies, with years of experience in the field, talk domain, deliverability, number of touches, testing and iteration, and what should go into creating a complete content strategy.
Hi everyone, this is Jordan, the owner and CEO of Greaser Consulting. On this call, I’ve got TJ with me, who is a long-time may say of Sapper Consulting. These guys have been prolific in the sales engagement consulting space. Basically since day one. They were, I think, really early partners of Outreach before Outreach even really had partners. And TJ, specifically, is one of these folks whose name pops up all the time, when you’re talking about sales engagements, specific works, as relates to content, the tech stack that fits around it; I always joke with him that we’re absolutely frenemies because we play in the same space; he’s at a different company; we compete on various issues. But at the end of the day, without a doubt in my mind, he does quality work; his team does quality work. I can’t complain, as much as I’d like to about, about the folks at Sapper; they’re a fantastic crew. And on this call, we’re going to talk about, like, the architecture of sales content. In the past, it was just “let’s write some good copy and ship it out”. But now there’s, like, settings; there’s schedules; there’s the steps involved. There’s the measurement; there’s the iteration. There’s an entire world and ecosystem here that has just opened up over the last few years in a way that just never existed before. And truly, TJ is one of the… I’m not sure how big his following is. I’m not sure how many people are tracking with him on the day-to-day, but in terms of practitioner of the job, who knows his stuff, he’s been there; he’s seen it. Just always enjoy chatting with him and, and sort of riffing on some of these topics. Enjoy.
Say you want some clarity in sales and marketing and SEP? Well, we have just the remedy: our podcast, RevOps Therapy. Yeah.
Hi, everyone, this is Jordan. I’ve got TJ with me. Introduce yourself.
Hey, Jordan, really happy to be here. TJ Macke, SVP Strategy at Sapper Consulting. And yeah, I love all things RevOps, sales process. I’m really excited to be here and to talk.
I always kind of laugh about some of this stuff as like the consulting ecosystem around sales engagement. It’s like a known universe. Like we all know each other. And everyone’s, everyone’s a frenemy, right?
Yeah, I think that’s fair. That’s a fair way to put it.
Right. So like, listen, I’m gonna avoid in the deal cycle. You’re gonna win; Sapper’s bigger than us; they might win a couple more times than we do. But anyway, the point is, we all know each other; most of us like each other. I can’t speak for TJ, but I think he’s at least half decent. It’s…I’m excited to have him here. I do have to say this, in all sincerity, is when I first started at Outreach, Sapper Consulting was the one consulting company that anytime… how do we want to say this? Anytime somebody talked about getting good content or working with good consultants, Sapper was the name that was brought up. TJ was the guy. Maybe there were a couple of names too. But TJ was certainly in that mix. And my point is, I’ve been down to their office; they’re good folks. And I’ve always enjoyed chatting with you. So TJ, glad you’re here.
Thanks, Jordan. I really appreciate that. And listen, truly, truly glad to be here and to talk with you. It’s always fun when we get to get together and riff and have a lot of respect for you and your team. And yeah, I’m really pleased that we can operate in the same space. I don’t wish it otherwise.
Till tonight when I pray for your demise.
No, it’s good. It’s big. It’s a space that’s big. There’s so much room here. So yeah.
So let’s, let’s, let’s talk content here. Let’s talk about a little bit of a sort of evolution in the conversation around content. I’m sure you remember the days whenever people, like salespeople, are like, “wait a minute, I can load a list in this thing, and I can just blast 5,000 people at once and like, and then the follow-up sequence and reply and like, oh, my goodness, I can just hammer this”. And so that’s where it started. And then it moved into like, “what’s the right subject line? What’s the right open? Like, how do you get opens?” Whatever. But now I mean, the space is settling down a little bit, right? Like it’s starting to calm down. People are starting to get a little more thoughtful. And so we wanted to at least start this conversation today. Talking about the architecture of content. And so, you know, that sounds, you know, almost, you know, engineering-like, the architecture of content. So TJ, like when you hear that phrase, and I know you think a lot about it, like, help, help us understand what is the architecture of content?
Yeah, I, I’m really passionate about this; I think this is important, and it doesn’t get talked about enough. I would define the architecture as the components that support and drive the messaging. So this is going to be the channels that you’re using. This is the number of touches that you’re gonna have in a campaign design, whether it’s a cadence, sequence, or you know, whatever platform or system you’re using; it’s going to be the settings, the time in between your touch points, how much automation versus manual activity, this represents the architecture of your content strategy, or your your messaging.
So as you get into this… you worked with how many organizations over the years on these topics? What’s an approximate number?
Definitely hundreds. And it might be, might be thousands. It has been a lot of fun. It’s been a long time, you know; I’ve been doing this with folks for five years now.
So, okay, on a percentage basis, what percentage of people that you work with, when you get in there to talk content, have any idea about what you just said? Hey, by the way, we know at the end, it’s 100%, because they worked with you. But at the beginning of the journey, like, like, like how few folks even know about what you’re talking about.
I would say like 90 to 95% don’t know what this is, and, and honestly don’t care. You know, for a lot of folks, you know, when the, the conversation starts, and they’re working with a consultant or an outsource writer, or anyone, you know; it doesn’t have to be Sapper. You know, their focus is “I need to, typically, I need to write an email or several emails, and I was told you’re the person, so please write me some emails, and I’ll pay you money.” And that’s generally how it goes. And when you’re like, “alright, well, let’s talk about, like, who this is for”, and they’re like, “well, we sell the 5000 different market segments. And I’d like this to be for all of them.”
Insert silver bullet.
That’s exactly right. “I want this to generate 500% more pipeline, and I’d like it to work tomorrow, if possible”. So yeah, most folks are, are thinking about messaging proper, and they just don’t have the framework. You know, Jordan, you appreciate this more than anyone before the invention of Outreach, like, one-to-one sales messaging was purely a rep-driven activity. You didn’t… there weren’t sequencing tools, you know; people weren’t codifying messaging into a narrative that happened over multiple steps, like, sure, sales teams had templates that lived in some documents somewhere that sales enablement would rail on, but it wasn’t really part of thoughtful sales strategy that was, like, day-to-day used, you know, and that’s where Outreach and Salesloft, and others have really changed the game. They’ve made this a true priority.
Yeah, I’ll like, I’ll cement what you’re saying about some of these settings. You know, as you know, right? You put somebody in a sequence; we’ll talk Outreach-speak here just for one of these sales engagement. And so you put them in a sequence, if you have a variable that doesn’t work, what happens? It breaks, right? Sequence fails. If somebody skips a new thread email, in the next thread is a reply thread, right? What happens to the sequence? It fails; it breaks; it fails; it breaks. I walked into an organization once. And this is why the settings matter, right? Understanding the functions… I walked into an organization that had Outreach for six months; they thought they had 10,000 people active in sequence; they were like showing me their numbers, the little checkboxes checked there in sequence. So you know, I navigate down to Sequence States and say, let’s see what’s going on. 9,000 of the 1,000 are in a failed state. Nobody like… 9,000 haven’t even received a message, right? That’s right, only 1000 had, because they had three sequences they were using with pointing the variables that didn’t pull in the data. And so the funniest thing was, there was one rep for six months, who had put 40 people in sequence a day, okay, never had one email send because it was all the same sequence that was broken. And he said, “Oh, my manager said that I had to do this. So you know. So I did it. And then I went and did my actual stuff.” So, you know, you can’t underestimate you know, even just the setting sides of some of the stuff. So, if you’re entertaining, like we’re gonna have fun with this right? I’m coming to you for consulting, which I know the Sapper guys would be happy to know Greaser Consulting is coming to Sapper for help. Right? So here we are. And you’re gonna have this conversation with people, what questions are you asking? And, like, what are you pointing people to as they think through some of us?
I mean, on the, on the front end, we really want to understand how you break up your audiences. You know, the truth is that everyone shouldn’t be treated equally, right? Like we should have some prioritization when it comes to our accounts and our different segments. And then inside of those account tiers, how are we thinking about the different audiences, the different personas, right? We should be able to speak differently to them. One of the things that we talk about a lot is, when it comes to true messaging, you know, folks talk about themselves too much. It’s like a commercial, right? And everybody, whenever they… a commercial comes on the TV or on their, you know, streaming service, they want to skip it; they hate it. And the same thing, you know, folks are working out of their inbox, and they get a commercial email that pops up; they want to skip it, they want to delete it, because it’s all about somebody else. And it’s not about something they care about. But you start talking about folks’ problems, and the things that are keeping them up at night, that’s when they start paying attention. And this you know, it’s… that’s, that’s what great sales messaging is built around, but you can’t talk about someone’s problems unless you’re talking about a person or a role. So why buyer personas are so important. It’s not just breaking it up for the sake of breaking it up. But you can’t be specific, unless you break it up. So I think that how you break up your audiences is the place to start. Because it also is going to impact the architecture of your sequence, what we’re talking about; you’re gonna, you’re gonna have different touch points; you have different levels of manual activity; you’re gonna have different settings. And at the rep level, you should. I’m curious for your take on this; like, you should be really thoughtful about how many prospects or accounts were telling reps to put into these sequences. Because I can tell you, I’ve seen fantastic messaging fall in its face, because reps are putting either far too many or far too few prospects into a sequence. It doesn’t work.
Well, let’s talk about this, like a sequence or cadence, and you know, play whatever, whatever you want to call it, right, the series of steps. I feel like I’ve heard the same stat since 2015. It takes between eight to twelve touches for an outbound whatever to respond. Yeah. Is that true? Right. Is that, is that stat actually true? Has it changed? Because I mean, everyone’s still saying the same thing. Eight to twelve, eight to twelve, eight to twelve.
I’ve heard folks say that it has gone up. You know, I’ve heard different reporters and analysts say that it’s trending up; some folks say it is plateaued. I think most recently I heard it’s now up to 17. So I, I am a believer, and I see it, you know, in working with clients that it, it, it does take a longer thread of touch points to win over most folks. But you know, I’ve also seen it plateau. You know, I’ve seen folks design 47-touch sequences that are 80 days long. Yeah, it’s I mean, folks, folks are getting a little nutty; they’re getting a little desperate. It’s hard.
You gotta… Yeah. explain, explain to me the justification for 47. I’m not, I’m not saying you did it. I just wanted to hear what they were thinking.
They were thinking that they were going to take folks on a long journey. And we’re talking Lord of the Rings journey here. They thought if they kept sharing success stories, and, you know, relevant use cases and follow-ups that they would eventually win them over. And, you know, at that point, you know, obviously, you got to break it up; you got to be using multiple sequences or send it back to marketing, nurture. So you got to… there are limits to your return. I think some of… the most… folks don’t talk about those, like, what does that mean? So like, if it’s 14 touch points, does that mean that nobody replies until step 14? And then you get all of your replies? That’s not the case. You know, I think that’s worth mentioning and folks talking about, you know. Typically, you’re gonna see. I’ll tell you what we’ve seen, and I’m sure other folks have seen different things. So, you know, not the only source of truth here. But, you know, we’ve seen that typically between steps, like three to five is where you’re going to see your highest percentage of engagement. And then steps like seven to ten, you’re gonna see your second most; you know, you might get like 30% of your engagement there. But then that last, you know, about last window of touchpoints, you know, 10 to whatever it is, 14, 17. You know, there’s somewhere between 15 to 30% of your replies are going to come from that long tail. And so you know, the justification is sure, you can cut it short and run a shorter sequence, but you’re missing out on some folks that only would have engaged, you know, after being sort of carried on the narrative and the journey to those last touch points.
So on that, on that note, though, how do you because, again, we’re talking about architecture here, at what point you get into a team that their volume players, right? Yeah, you know, let’s, let’s face it, anybody that was signing on, let’s just say originally, I think it’s, some teams have gotten more sophisticated. But usually, the original intent of getting on an Outreach or a SalesLoft, is, we could just do more of whatever, right? Like that’s usually the first intent. And then somewhere, whether it be six months or a year, or whatever down the line, teams will start to realize “I can actually work pretty sophisticated in this thing.” Like it’s not just some spray thing, right? But that being said, at least to start, usually, you’re going to run with a company that’s like, like, they just want to get the volume out there. So like, do you have conversations at all, or even help people think through, like, “Listen, you can squeeze ten more percent out of five more emails, but at the amount of volume that you do, like, you might need to protect your domain here. So like, let’s, let’s cut it off.
Yeah, the domain and deliverability conversation, and I’m sure you’ve run into this too, it’s year-over-year becomes more important. And to your point, like, if you’re running a sequence that isn’t getting engagement past step, whatever, ten, twelve, fifteen, seven, like, you’re way better off cutting it so that you’re not sending out, you know, engagements that aren’t being interacted with. You know, because this is… I tell people all the time: today is the easiest day you’ll ever have in your life to prospect; tomorrow is gonna be harder; the next day is gonna be harder. Like it… you know, billions of dollars is spent to prevent people from getting unwanted messages, whether it’s in their inbox or on the phone. And so you got to be really thoughtful about protecting your deliverability; it’s huge.
On that note, are you concerned at all about… I can’t remember what this is called. But I, when I, when I say this, you’re gonna, you’re gonna, you’re gonna know. There’s a company that started the like, if you want access to the inbox, you have to pay $1 for… I can’t remember. Listen, I’m gonna be honest. So I thought, well, that’s an interesting idea. I’m not sure. Like, even personally, if I would use it. Like, because like, what if grandma emails me, right? Does she need to like, right? But I’m sure they have settings around that; there’s exclusion lists, I’m not trying to knock it. But like is that… as you talk about, as you talk about content and architecture, and you think about the way things are moving, and it’s getting harder? Like, are you concerned at all about some of these blockers that are coming up? It’s not just cold email, or cold calling that’s dead? Maybe it’s cold email, right?
I think that… my personal take on it is this like, that is that should be a concern for more folks. But I’m also a believer that there will always be another channel. So like, if tomorrow, you know, Outlook and Gmail released some integrated gated feature that makes it to where, you know, I can only email you if I’ve had an in-person meeting with your something there will, you know, that means that LinkedIn messaging will become, suddenly, all the more relevant. There’s always going to be this sort of semi-open access point for businesses that email has lived in. And I think it’ll be a long time before that gets fully replaced, but it is going to get harder, and it’s up to companies to adapt to it. But that’s what’s so beautiful about a sequence is it, the channel doesn’t actually matter that much. It’s just we live in a world where email is the prime, you know, the predominant channel. But you know, if it’s LinkedIn, it’s some new app, and all of a sudden, we only do business on Tiktok, I don’t know. Like it’ll adapt and you know, sequences will integrate with those, those new channels.
Do cold InMails, again, we’re getting down to structure as a part of a sequence, do those work? Oh, I gotcha on this one. This is the trap question.
I will tell you that I rarely see teams be successful as they want to be. Can an InMail touch work as part of an integrated narrative and a sequence? Sure. But like, you know, are you gonna get a ton of engagement off of that specific step? Probably depends a lot on your audience, but I haven’t seen it work super, super well.
Yeah, I actually just, I wish I could remember the guy’s name, but I saw something on LinkedIn today where a guy wrote and said, “if you’re going to InMail message me, or you’re going to like, post on here, just about yourself, get out an ad, do a paid ad, or get a billboard. But if you’re here to actually engage and write and whatever, then you know, you’re part of my community; let’s do this.” And I actually, I’m going to be transparent; I tend to not like 80% of the stuff that’s on LinkedIn. I tend to think… But I read that right there, I thought, you know, that was good. Like, because I thought that really does get the presence of what, like an InMail and LinkedIn is actually supposed to be, not what it always is, but what it’s supposed to be.
That’s a, that’s a good distinction, Jordan, like, if you’re able to, like, be thoughtful about who you’re reaching out to, and the types of problems that they’re probably dealing with, and you can speak to them very specifically and individually, that’s likely a great use case for using an InMail as part of an integrated strategy. But, you know, the canned template that gets thrown into a sequence, sometimes as an afterthought, rarely provides the type of engagement which is exactly to your point. If you, you know, if you’re going to do a billboard, take out a billboard, like stop mailing me billboards, and that’s what a lof of people do; they mail billboards. People don’t want that.
People don’t want that. That’s the, that’s the phrase that “people don’t want that. They don’t want that”. Here’s the question that I get; I don’t get this question all the time, in terms of… how do I want to say this? I don’t get this question all the time, where somebody will, like actually verbalize it. But I get this in the way of rep behavior, which is like, this is such a horrible way to describe this; I should find a better way because I’m gonna make so many people mad when I say this. But every time I see a sales team, I think “you have the eagles, and you have the pigeons”. Like, already, you’re like, “Okay, he’s gonna get punched”. And like, and don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the pigeons are terrible; they serve a purpose. Right? Like, like, but you know, you kind of know what you’re gonna get, right? You do the process; you do the thing, work the flows, you get your outcome. And then you have a couple eagles on the team, where like man, and if you make them go live with the pigeons, they’re gonna die. Like they need to soar. They need to do their own thing or whatever. I set this whole thing up, right, just to say, like, are sequences for everybody in the sales org? Like, like, are they for the top reps? Are they not for the top reps?
This is a fantastic, and it’s a very loaded question. Lots of people have opinions here. But here’s what I’ll say. I think it’s, it’s different for…
I’m trying to get you. I’m trying…
Listen, you keep it up, you’re gonna get me; people will be tweeting at me, and I’m not even gonna know what to do. But here’s, here’s what I say. I think it’s, it’s different for what I would say like early-stage companies or companies that are like experimenting in the market. Like the role of the eagle, in my opinion, when you’re early to market, now whether enterprise, launching some new product or you’re a tiny startup, the role of the eagle rep is to innovate and break new ground. And when you’re early, that is so critical to very quickly get them out into the world, test, and win and because that gives you the framework you can hand to your pigeons to be able to run. I said it; they’re gonna come for me. That’s okay. Because I know what you’re saying. There are some reps that are innately driven to innovate and experiment and try new things. And there are some reps that want to show up; they want to have the playbook given to them. And listen, there’s not anything wrong with that. But it’s just, you know, what drives people and what they bring to the table. So all that to say, you know, there are, there are places where having eagle reps, innovating on content and leading the charge, very important. However, when you get to a certain size, just often is not able to exist in the same function. You’ve got to have governance; you’ve got to prevent a situation where you’ve got thousands, potentially, of different sequences and templates, because it makes it impossible to know what works and then you don’t know if the eagles or the pigeons are winning. And that’s a bad place to be in, but a surprising number of companies live in. So at some point…
What size? What size?
I think it changes, but like when you’ve got, you know, if you have a team of probably around 50 reps, depending on how different their segments and audiences are, like you’re getting to a place where you probably need like a true governance motion and you’re locking down content creation. You know, 10 to 50 is a gray area, depends on your org, depends on how fleshed out things are, and less than 10? I don’t think you need… I think it’s heavier than what it’s worth. And you want to have everybody collaborating and experimenting on content as you grow. That’s probably, you know, inevitably there’s places where that…
So what I’m, what I’m hearing you say is like the eagles themselves, let’s talk generally, in a place where like, this is allowed. The eagles themselves need to be allowed to innovate, running gun, whatever. But once you… and then pull that down to the rest of the team. So I think you said it much more eloquently than I did; you know, the folks that want to create the playbook versus the ones that want to follow the playbook. That’s, that’s a much more eloquently-said way of portraying that. With that in mind, though, is that actually part of the, as you go up-level into the enterprise phase, you start getting more, more reps and more teams. If, if those eagles aren’t allowed, or the playbook communities aren’t allowed to just do what they want anymore, in some ways, is that, is that the talk track: “Well, listen, like, you’re part of a large organization; there’s gonna be governance. Like, yeah, that’s just that’s the job. I’m sorry to say.”
I think, you know, there’s, there’s some finesse there, right? Like, I think the best teams do empower. There’s some finesse; the best teams empower those reps that are super motivated and driven to experiment, like in certain confines, right, like they can, they can create one new play a month, and they have to report back on how it goes, for instance, but the experimentation, they make room for it, but it has to be done within confines and the same, you know, kind of completely hands-off, free form, you know, try as much as you want experiment, write as much content as you want that that does have to change; it can’t, can’t exist at scale, and still get value and data from it. So yeah, that’s it.
Yeah, I think there’s, excuse me, there’s an important thing that you’re hinting at here. And you talked about these equals leading the creativity. And then you went over and talked about, well, if there’s 5,000 sequences, we don’t know what works. And there’s, there’s this line here, that is really true that I’ve seen organizations, the mistake they make is they think we need to create content, and they create 100 of whatever. And then they never look at it, like to see what works and what doesn’t work. And the name of the game of this stuff, like, the reality is it’s not about like, you know, Sapper or Greaser Consulting created you a sequence; it’s about… the reality is, we created a starting point for you, and now we iterate and learn, right? Yes. Yeah, but too often, the thought process is it’s created. It’s good. We’ve checked that box, and we’ve left it, so yeah, exactly. Like we’re done. And so one of the problems with, like, it’s really interesting: the larger the organization gets, like, all of a sudden, we start to shut off the creativity because we need to get the data. But then we run into this other issue of like, “Yeah, but all we did was create the sequence, did anyone actually measure it?” Right? And then did we shift it at all? So like, I mean, there’s, there’s a few gotchas in here. Like, it’s not just one; it starts to get more complicated, the larger your team is.
That’s right. It’s huge. And it, you know, to your point, like you can really quickly create excellent content and demotivate your team. You know, if you’re not being thoughtful with introducing governance and restricting creation and cleaning things up in your instance, like, you know, you can have great content that nobody wants to use. And so yeah, like there’s, there’s a real balance that companies need to bring to this conversation, and thinking about what they’re creating and how they’re iterating it, and I think that that note that you really landed on there is so important. People come to us; I’m sure you get similar questions and pushes, like, you know, they want to know the benchmarks. I want to know the benchmarks that we should be achieving, and how far off are we, and how quickly can we get to those benchmarks? And the truth is that those benchmarks, sure they’re there, and we’ll have that conversation. But there’s so much variance based on your audience and how mature is the product you’re bringing to market? Do you work in a saturated space? How technical is your buyer? How, how experienced are your sellers and the people you’re prospecting or messaging from? Like all of these things take those benchmarks and distort them. And so the most effective teams instead do this. They set a quarterly or bi-annual, whatever it is, there’s a period of time, let’s call it quarterly, and they set an optimization target. And they say, “Alright, here’s what we’re going to commit to; benchmarks be damned. We’re going to improve our reply rate by 5% every quarter for the next two years. That’s what we’re going to do. And, you know, we might be starting from the bottom, but this is going to guarantee that we’re focused on the right thing to get us to where we want to go”. And at some point, they’ll hit a hurdle. And they’ll have to innovate past it; at some point, they’ll hit the plateau. And maybe they don’t do 5% for two years. But that’s the motion that I think builds on your point, Jordan, of, you can’t just ship it out and call it good. You got to optimize. This is always the start of the journey, not the end.
Yeah, the, the issue… I’ll give you a, like a sales gripe. I shouldn’t do this, but I’ll give you the gripe anyway. If I come to a call, and I say, “Hey, listen, you know, it’s not about content creation; it’s about content iteration. So we’re going to create this content for you. And then it needs to be iterated over the next 12 months. But like, that’s what actually needs to happen.” But we’ll get stakeholders on there that are saying, “Whoa, this is, this is a six-week project, or this is a two-month project. Right? Right. What do you mean, what, 12 months?”, and then all of a sudden, you’re like, you’re sort of backed into this corner of like, “okay, we’ll create for you, but like, please, for the love of God, and all that is holy, like, like iterate upon it; like, this content is going to be world’s better than what you had, but yet still misses the point.” Like, yeah, the point is, you’re constantly like, so, so actually, everybody sells content creation. And that’s what everyone’s buying. But what actually should be sold is a path of iteration. Right? But, but there’s too much. Man, there’s just such a hurdle there for folks to shift their mind of that, like, right out of the gate, maybe, maybe you’ve drank some kool-aid that gets you some knowledge that I don’t have. But that tends to be like, this is where the conversation gets stuck.
Yeah, we see we see similar things. Yeah, I don’t think we’re, you know, beyond that, because this what you’re describing, it’s just, in my opinion, not to rag on the customer, but it’s an education gap. You know, there’s a lot within sales engagement, like we’re talking about the beginning, that has just changed the game for how sales process and sales enablement and sales reporting and adoption, it’s just, it’s different. It’s different than it used to be. And so a lot of people don’t have this framework of, you know, invest in a sequence, and I’m going to then build an optimization framework, and I’m going to track it for six months and put a ton of time and tension. Maybe I’m gonna spin up a committee to support it. Like, it’s just not something that people have in their heads. And so getting them to that point is really important. But to your point, it can be really difficult, and often you got to meet them, maybe to your point, sell them, sell them what they want, but in the end, give them what they need. That’s a Matt Millen-ism. For the record.
Yeah, that is; that… I was laughing because I’m like, I think I’ve heard that before. Hey, man, listen, we could go, we could go for, I think another hour, just, on just the settings of Outreach, most likely. But with that said, we’re at time today. For the listeners, thanks for tuning in. If you want to get ahold of TJ, again, frenemy, he’s over at Sapper; you want to call Greaser. No, I’m just, I’m just messing. The reality is these are good guys. Go talk to him if you need anything. TJ, anything you want to say before we close this out?
Truly a pleasure. This is so fun, you know, and it’s… I think frenemy’s a great word… competitive, but at the same time, there’s nothing better than getting to talk shop with folks that like are intimately working on the same problems. So, you know, you guys, you guys are on an amazing crew. We’ve recommended many folks come and work with you, and I will continue to do so. So yeah, I love this. Hope we get to do it again.
Stay out of trouble. See ya.
I will. I will.
Hot dog. That was a great episode. Thanks for listening. If you want to learn more about Greaser Consulting or any information you heard on today’s episode, visit us online at www.greaserconsulting.com. Be sure to click the Follow button and the bell icon to be notified on the latest here at RevOps Therapy. Thanks and see you real soon.