u/Comfortable_Damage20

We export lists from Sales Navigator as raw profile URLs because that's what feeds cleanly into Clay, but the gap between having a URL and a verified email we can put in a sequence is where coverage tanks.

Currently sitting on around 600 URLs for a push we're trying to get out next week, and I’ve been running the list through FullEnrich (seen it come up in threads here for exactly this), and the find rate is solid.

But I'm not sure if the triple verification pass includes catch-all filtering in the standard flow, and last time catch-alls slipped through it tanked a whole sending domain, so I want to be certain before export.

For folks doing this regularly, what does the verification workflow come down to before the list hits a sequence?

It's renewal season and we've been going through our stack.

We just cut a survey tool and an old BI dashboard but kept BuildBetter because it reads our calls and tickets and gives each account a short narrative of what changed since last month, which knocked out most of the QBR prep grunt work.

Gainsight seems to hold at enterprise but a few people I know at under 500 companies are back in the market, so wondering what that looks like for others.

Anyway, what's on your keep list and what got cut?

Mon neveu a 16 ans, il a commencé la salle en janvier, et il m'a demandé de parler à ses parents parce qu'ils veulent pas qu'il touche à la whey ni à la créatine.

Il m'avait montré son panier avant d'en parler chez lui. Il hésitait entre du MyProtein et du Nutrimea, il a pris le deuxième parce qu'un gars de sa salle en prend. Whey et créatine monohydrate, une soixantaine d'euros en tout. Sa mère a réagi comme s'il commandait des stéroïdes.

Leurs arguments, c'est mot pour mot ceux que j'ai entendus il y a quinze ans. Ça bloque la croissance, c'est mauvais pour les reins, c'est la porte d'entrée vers autre chose, et de toute façon si t'as besoin de ça c'est que tu triches.

Ce qui m'a fait bizarre, c'est que moi au même âge je secouais mon shaker dans les toilettes du lycée parce que j'avais honte. Je me disais sincèrement que j'étais en train de tricher. Je mangeais mes boîtes de thon dans le bus pour pas le faire devant les autres.

Et là je me retrouve de l'autre côté de la table à expliquer à ses parents que non, et je m'aperçois que je sais pas argumenter autrement qu'en disant « mais si, tout le monde en prend », ce qui est exactement le genre de réponse qui les convaincra pas.

Du coup j'ai besoin d'aide des mecs qui ont commencé jeunes : on vous a sorti quoi exactement à l'époque, et est-ce qu'il y a des choses là-dedans qui se sont révélées vraies avec le recul ?

Avril. C'est la date qu'on nous a donnée aux HCL pour un rendez-vous d'endocrinologie, en appelant fin juin. Huit mois.

C'est pour ma mère, qui habite Villeurbanne. Thyroïdite d'Hashimoto diagnostiquée en 2019, sous Levothyrox depuis, suivie tous les six mois par une endocrinologue en libéral jusqu'à ce qu'elle parte l'an dernier. Depuis, plus personne ne prend de nouveaux patients dans le secteur.

Son généraliste renouvelle le traitement mais refuse de toucher au dosage sans avis spécialisé, ce qui se tient. Sauf qu'entre-temps elle a repris du poids, elle est épuisée le matin, et personne ne regarde ses chiffres.

Ce qu'on fait en attendant, c'est une prise de sang tous les trois mois au labo Biogroup près de chez elle pour avoir au moins TSH, T4 libre et les anticorps, avec un suivi en ligne chez Lucis pour voir l'évolution sur une courbe au lieu d'accumuler des feuilles dans une pochette. Ça ne remplace pas l'endocrino, ça sert juste à ne pas arriver en avril avec un seul résultat isolé.

Est-ce que quelqu'un dans l'agglo a trouvé un endocrinologue qui prend encore de nouveaux patients, en libéral ou ailleurs qu'aux HCL ?

Spent a while mapping this out before we decided whether to do it ourselves, and the sequence is longer than what we estimated because each stage gates the next and you can't run them cleanly in parallel.
Notary appointment to authenticate the Gesellschaftsvertrag books 1 to 2 weeks out (3 to 4 in Berlin or Munich right now), submission to the Handelsregister takes another 3 to 6 weeks depending on your district court, Finanzamt registration only starts once you have that extract in hand so add another 4 to 8 weeks for the Steuernummer.
And opening a business bank account needs the same extract, which means even if you try to run it alongside the tax office, you're still chasing separate queues at every step.
By the time you can process payroll you're typically 5 to 6 months from the notary appointment, often longer, and the 90-day floor people cite online assumes every step hits its minimum AND a tax advisor is coordinating all of it simultaneously, which almost never happens on a first entity.
And when we ran that against the EOR option (Workmotion in our case, but could be Remote or anyone in the same category), the same hire was contracted in under 2 weeks, which kind of answers the question.
The entity route makes sense once you have the bandwidth to sit in those queues, and enough room in the timeline for whoever you're trying to bring on.

Compliance lead at a 200-person company, we're expanding into Germany and France in Q4 and the data privacy side is starting to bite.
Our legal team flagged that the main GDPR exposure when hiring across EU jurisdictions centers on where employment data lives and who processes it, well beyond the usual paperwork.
We've been going back and forth between setting up local entities or going with an employer of record, and every conversation we've had stalls on the data residency side. What we keep hearing from providers is that if they're EU-incorporated, employment data stays within EU boundaries structurally.
Which means you don't create cross-border transfer exposure the way you would if your HR systems live outside the EU.
Currently torn between Deel and Workmotion (both EU-established) and trying to figure out if that structural difference holds up legally, or if you still need the same DPAs regardless of where the employer of record is incorporated.
Before we commit to either, how did you approach it, and did the EOR being EU-incorporated change how you thought about the data residency side?

Sexe : Femme
Âge : 41
Antécédents : épilepsie traitée depuis 12 ans, fausse couche tardive il y a 18 mois, pas d'autre traitement en cours

« Tout est normal, revenez si ça empire. » C'est la troisième fois que ma belle-sœur entend cette phrase depuis février.

Depuis l'hiver elle dort mal, elle a les mains gelées en permanence et elle décroche complètement vers 15h. Trois prises de sang, tout dans les clous à chaque fois.

Ce qui nous étonne c'est qu'elle a deux raisons assez évidentes de regarder d'un peu plus près. Elle est sous antiépileptique depuis douze ans, et en lisant la notice on est tombés sur le fait que ce type de traitement au long cours peut faire baisser la vitamine D et les folates. Et elle a fait une fausse couche tardive il y a un an et demi, avec une hémorragie, donc côté fer il s'est passé quelque chose cette année-là.

Sauf que sur les trois bilans, ni la vitamine D ni les folates n'ont jamais été demandés. Ce qui a été fait c'est NFS, glycémie, TSH. Sa ferritine ressort à 19 pour une fourchette qui démarre à 15, et sa TSH à 3,8 sur une fourchette qui monte à 4. Techniquement normal, les deux.

Son médecin ne veut pas aller plus loin tant que rien ne sort de la fourchette. Je comprends la logique, il peut pas prescrire à l'infini, et il met la fatigue sur le compte du traitement et de ce qu'elle a traversé, ce qui s'entend aussi.

Elle a fini par payer un bilan plus large de son côté pour avoir T3, T4, vitamine D et folates. Elle avait regardé Medichecks et Thriva, mais aucun des deux ne fait le prélèvement en France, donc elle est partie sur Lucis. Elle a fait la prise de sang mardi, elle récupère les résultats la semaine prochaine.

Et c'est là que je bloque pour elle. J'ai aucune idée de ce qu'un médecin fait d'un bilan qu'il n'a pas prescrit lui-même, s'il le prend en compte, s'il refait tout à sa façon, ou s'il l'écarte d'office parce que ça vient d'ailleurs.

Pour ceux qui ont déjà présenté à leur médecin des analyses faites en dehors du circuit, comment ça s'est passé ?

Salut à tous,
Je cours depuis quatre ans, dans les 50 km par semaine, et je prépare un semi en octobre. Rien de spécial de mon côté, mais je me retrouve à faire les recherches pour un pote du club et je sèche, donc je tente ici.
Lui il tourne à 60 bornes par semaine et il traînait une fatigue bizarre depuis mars. Bilan sanguin, ferritine à 18. Son médecin lui a prescrit du sulfate de fer, il a tenu 3 semaines avant d'arrêter, mal de ventre en continu. Il le revoit la semaine prochaine pour ajuster, donc le traitement se règle entre eux, c'est pas ce que je viens demander ici.
Ce que je cherche c'est du vécu. Deux gars du club lui ont dit d'aller voir du côté du bisglycinate parce que ça passerait mieux au niveau digestif. L'un est là-dessus depuis deux ans avec du Granions, l'autre a un truc de chez Nutrimea. Les deux disent que ce qui a compté c'est le fer, pas la marque.
Sauf qu'en regardant les boîtes, la teneur en fer élémentaire est complètement différente de l'une à l'autre, et c'est jamais marqué devant, faut retourner la boîte pour le trouver. Du coup je sais pas si la vraie différence se joue sur la forme ou juste sur la dose réelle qu'on prend sans le savoir.
Vous qui avez eu une ferritine basse en courant, vous avez senti une différence entre les formes, ou c'était surtout une question de dose et de durée ?
Merci d'avance.

We're in a platform eval for a multi-brand lifestyle retailer, and the fashion-specific complexity is making the demos hard to trust.
We have deep size/colour variant matrices where some base products sit at 180+ combinations, plus heavy returns volume that has to trace back to the SKU, and seasonal resets twice a year that eat up a chunk of the catalog team's time each cycle.
We're down to commercetools, Shopify Plus, and SCAYLE (the last one specifically because of the fashion-vertical positioning), but the first two have stayed on composable architecture slides and never touched the operations layer.
Trying to pressure-test whether variant depth degrades storefront performance beyond a certain point, how returns attribution works at the SKU level, how seasonal merchandising resets happen without dev involvement, and whether lookbook/outfit navigation is native or something you bolt on.
For those who've been through this for a fashion catalog, what moved the decision?

We've all been quoting open rates that are functionally fiction for the last 2 years or so, and the reason is that every major sales-and-marketing tool now ships inbox AI that fetches the full HTML of inbound emails before any human sees them.

The platforms (Salesforce Einstein, Microsoft Copilot for Outlook, Google Gemini in Workspace, Apollo's email intel, Outreach's AI conversation analyzer, SalesLoft Rhythm, HubSpot's AI assistant) all need the email body to produce summaries, response suggestions, intent scoring, and inbox prioritization.

And the only way to get the body is to fetch it server-side, fetching the HTML, and firing your tracking pixel.

In fact, your MAP can't tell the difference between a human opening the email and a copilot summarizing it, because both fire the pixel identically and neither leaves a fingerprint your analytics layer can filter out.

The implication is that your reported open rate is now a mixed metric, with a 30% reported open rate in 2026 sitting somewhere closer to 8-15% human eyes, and the rest being AI pre-fetch.

The split depends on what percentage of your audience is on Outlook with Copilot enabled (enterprise-heavy senders are at 60%+ AI pre-fetch), what percentage uses an MAP-attached sales tool, and what percentage uses an agentic assistant on their inbox.

The ESPs and MAPs have known about this since at least late 2024 because the deliverability community has been writing about it…

But they haven't recalibrated benchmark reporting because their pricing models are tied to engagement metrics and inflated open rates make the platforms look better in QBRs and competitive comparisons.

You can verify this by pulling email-open events from your commerce backend, whether SCAYLE, Shopify Plus or commercetools, or from your outbound tool like Lemlist, Apollo, or any other, segmenting recipients with firmographic data from any enrichment tool like FullEnrich or Clearbit into enterprise Outlook and personal Gmail, and comparing open rates.

The Enterprise Outlook segment opened at 4x the gmail segment, and the delta is the AI pre-fetch.

While you're at it, kill your open-rate optimization work, because it's now optimizing for which subject lines AI agents click through, and your reply rate is the metric that still measures humans since AI agents don't reply.

Been doing a cleanup of my subscriptions and it made me realize how few of these I actually open. I've probably signed up for 30+ AI tools in the last two years and the number I use weekly is like four. everything else was a demo that impressed me for a day.

What actually survived: chatgpt obviously, mostly for scripts and rough drafts. cursor for code. perplexity when I need something for my studies with sources. and argil for turning scripts into video (I do some content creation on the side).

What I cancelled: three different "ai writing assistants" that were all just worse chatgpt wrappers. a notetaker that transcribed everything perfectly and produced summaries I never once read lol. and an AI video editor that technically worked but took longer than just editing it myself, which felt like the whole point defeated.

The pattern for me is that the ones that stuck replace an actual recurring cost or a task I genuinely hate. the ones I dropped were solving problems I didn't really have, they just demoed well.

So what tools are actually on your monthly bill, and what did you cancel? let’s share our AI stacks.

I'll keep this short since the title says most of it, our health scores are still basically login frequency plus vibes.

I keep seeing Gainsight and ChurnZero pitched as AI-first now, Vitally looks slick, and a PM friend swears by BuildBetter for mining QBR calls for risk signals.

Before we commit to anything, I'm trying to figure out what's moved your renewals number.

I've never said this to anyone in my life, and I'm not sure why I'm typing it now, but I think I built my whole company on something I'm ashamed of.

When I was first building the team, I went looking for where the good people were cheapest, and I told myself the whole time that this was just me being a smart founder.

So my team is spread across a few countries where salaries are a fraction of what they'd be back home, and it's all completely above board, everyone's on an employer of record, which if you've never dealt with one is a middleman that legally becomes your staff's employer in their country so you don't have to open a company there.

It handles all the payroll and tax on top, and for the people who already know how these work, I didn't even go with one of the big trusted ones you all know like Deel or Workmotion, I found a smaller and cheaper one to shave a bit more off the cost.

So every month the money just goes out on its own, without me signing a thing or even looking at it, and I never once have to face the sheer size of the gap between what their work is worth to me and the little I hand over for it.

And it's the gratitude that undoes me, because every so often one of them will message me to thank me for a salary that to me is rounding error, and i'll sit there knowing this person is sharper than most of the people I could hire at 5 times the cost back home, and the only reason I get away with paying them what I do is where they happened to be born.

I know all the justifications (it's a good wage where they live, it's legal, it's more than they'd make locally, i'm giving people real jobs, etc…) and every bit of that is true…

But none of it touches the thing underneath, which is that I sat down and optimized human beings for cost, and the cleaner and more above-board I made it, the easier it got to never think about it.

So I guess that's why I'm posting this today, because I've got no one in my life I can say it to, and I don't know how to feel okay about who that makes me as a person and as a founder.

I do cold outbound for a b2b company and a big part of the job is emailing lists of prospects, which normally goes out one address at a time through a proper sending tool.

So every person only ever sees their own name in the [to] line and never has any clue they're one of a few hundred getting the same note.

This week i was moving too fast through my morning and figured i'd just fire off a smaller batch by hand from my own inbox to save 10 minutes, so i pasted the whole list into a single email, and because i was rushing i dropped every address into the [to] field instead of BCC and hit send without looking twice.

The list itself was clean, i can't even remember whether it got verified through FullEnrich or Apollo that week, but it was solid, which is what turned a small slip into a properly bad afternoon, because it meant several hundred real people just landed in each other's inboxes all at once.

The replies started coming in fast, some people politely asking who i was and how to get off the list, a few of them a lot less politely pointing out that i'd just handed their work email to a room full of strangers and competitors.

And then one helpful guy replied-all to ask everybody to please stop replying-all, which naturally made it drag on even longer.

Then my manager got a forwarded copy from someone at a target account we'd been chasing for months, with a short note asking whether this was really how we handled people's data.

So i spent the rest of the day writing apologies and killing the campaign before sitting down with our ops lead to explain why a clean and fairly expensive list was now a few hundred people who will never want to hear from us again.

TL;DR: i manually sent a prospect list using "to" instead of “BCC”, exposed everyone's work email to each other and to our competitors, blew up a target account we'd chased for months, and turned a good list into a permanent do-not-contact pile, all because i didn't check one field before i hit send.

We've had every sales and customer call at our B2B fintech auto-transcribed for a couple of years now, and most of it just sits in a folder.

So a while back i ran the whole archive through one of those AI tools that pull themes out of call transcripts, took the synthesized version of what customers tell us, and dropped it into ChatGPT with a single instruction, to describe this company as if it were one person (personality and all), based only on how it talks to its customers.

I was expecting a generic on-brand summary, and for a second that's what it looked like, right up until it started describing someone i knew on sight…

A person who's helpful and quick to reassure but apologizes too much and over-explains when nervous and leaves a trail of circle-back promises that go nowhere, and lining that up against our own support calls hurt to read.

The model wasn't reading our mission statement or our marketing when it did this, it only had the raw texture of thousands of real conversations.

So it picked up the things we do on repeat without noticing, the reflexive over-apologizing and the hedging whenever a customer pushes on price and the way we go quiet on the hard questions, and seeing all of it turned into a single personality made it obvious how much of our brand is just our unexamined habits repeated until they hardened into who we are.

I've started re-running it every quarter now as a mirror, and it's already changed how we coach the team on calls, and the describe-it-as-a-person framing pulled out more than any dashboard we've built.

So if you haven't turned a model loose on your own raw data like this, it's worth doing, and if you have, what's the most revealing thing it's pulled out for you that a normal report never would?

PS. for anyone about to ask what i used to pull the calls together, a quick Google of AI call-transcript tools and you'll get the obvious ones (Fireflies, BuildBetter, Otter and a few others…)

PPS: it barely matters which one you land on, the describe-it-as-a-person prompt is what did the work here.

Watched this play out from both sides this year and it is absurd.

Candidates run their CV and cover letter through an LLM tuned to whatever the job ad says, so the application is basically machine written.

Then the company feeds every application into an AI screener to rank them, because no human can read that volume, so the CV is now one model writing to beat another model reading, and the human on either end has stopped doing the judging at all.

An article I read put a number on the candidate side, something like 60% of applicants in the UK and US already use AI in the process (feels low honestly).

The CV basically stopped being a signal the second both sides automated it, everyone reads like a top 5% candidate now, and there was a line from one of these recruiting founders, Constantin Michel who runs Synmatch, that stuck with me, that if a keyword is just sitting on the CV it falls apart in about 30 seconds once you make someone talk through it.

Which is sort of the whole thing, because the only part that survived the arms race is making people demonstrate the skill live, everything upstream of that is two robots negotiating.

So is the CV just done as a filter now, or has anyone seen a version of automated screening that is not just one AI grading another?

We're an australian series B with a fully-distributed engineering team of 22, of which 7 are long-term contractors in the EU (2 in germany, 2 in spain, 1 in netherlands, 1 in poland, 1 in portugal).

All 7 have been on rolling B2B or freelance contracts with us for anywhere between 14 and 32 months and do the same work as our salaried employees, follow our sprint cadence, use our tooling, and only work for us.

Our legal counsel just flagged that we're sitting on 5 different flavours of misclassification risk simultaneously, and the risk profile per country is not the same.

Germany's scheinselbstständigkeit test is the strictest, Spain's TRADE (trabajador autónomo económicamente dependiente) framework triggers backpay at 75% revenue concentration, Netherlands has the DBA law with the 2026 enforcement moratorium ending, Poland's ZUS reclassification chain runs 5 years back, and Portugal's article 12 CTF presumption kicks in at contractual dependency and full-time hours.

The practical path that makes sense is to convert all 7 to full employment through an EOR to close the risk before an audit finds it, but we're then looking at 5 different EOR arrangements or one EOR covering all 5 countries.

We did an initial call with Workmotion because they own direct entities in all 5 markets, and a follow-up with Deel who route poland and portugal through local partners, despite these being the most established options, i'd want to hear how others handled this.

thoughts?

Our email flows are starving for fresh product shots.

For context, I do retention for a fashion label and the studio books out weeks ahead, so every reshoot for a new colorway or a seasonal flow eats budget we'd rather put into sends. Lifestyle imagery is the worst offender, because we can't just drop the flat PDP shot into a welcome or a winback.

So i'd like to know how you guys are feeding your flows? Pulling from the PDP set, shooting in-house, or using one of the AI generators?

We're still on Photoroom for the quick stuff, but someone on my team started generating our basics with Tayla and I can't tell the difference in the inbox, which has me wondering where the rest of you have landed.

Came out of winter with my vitamin D low despite taking a standard 1000 IU all year, so before I just throw more pills at it I'm trying to understand what I got wrong.

From what I can tell the standard 1000 IU is on the low side for correcting a real deficiency, a lot of people end up at 3000-4000 IU to move the number, and since it's fat-soluble, taking it with a proper fatty meal matters more than most labels admit. The other thing that keeps coming up is pairing it with K2, which is supposed to help direct calcium to bone rather than arteries, though I can't tell how settled that science is.

Brand-wise everything I looked at does roughly the same thing once you match the dose, the big US names like NOW and Thorne, Nutrimea bundles the D3 and K2 together, and the supermarket own-brands which usually bury a token amount of D in a multivit. The gap between them felt smaller than the price differences suggested.

For people who've corrected a real deficiency, was it mainly the higher dose that moved your number at retest, or did the K2 and taking-it-with-fat side make a real difference?

Running paid social for a DTC brand and our biggest bottleneck isn't budget, it's creative volume. We burn through UGC angles fast, and testing properly means way more variations than we can realistically produce.

Right now we lean on hiring creators directly, which gives the best quality but it's slow and the per-video cost adds up fast when you need volume. We've dipped into the marketplaces like Billo and Fiverr too, quicker but hit or miss on quality. We even messed around with an AI tool (Argil) to spin up rough variations from a script, and it's fine for throwaway tests but I'm not sold, you can tell it's not a real person.

For people running high-volume creative testing, is it even realistic to produce enough genuine human UGC to test at the pace you need, or does the cost and turnaround just not scale past a point?