# Jordan Farkas, Head of RevOps (Indie Builder, 3 months post-exit) — read of Decision Maker Finder AI, June 5 2026 > "11 years in B2B sales tooling, employee #4 at a 60-person pipeline SaaS that sold last fall, currently evaluating what to build next while picking up my 7-year-old from second grade at 3pm every day. That's my hard stop." ## How I got here Someone in the Microconf Slack dropped the link with the message "interesting pricing model, not sure who this is for." I clicked mostly out of curiosity about the studio model, not because I woke up needing a decision-maker finder. I already know that space. I lived in it. I was the person configuring Apollo for a 40-rep org. ## What I clicked first "Find the Right Person to Sell To" didn't pull me in. That's the headline for literally every sales intelligence tool since 2018. What stopped me was the scorecard: "$-27,000 Year-1 take-home (Fermi)" and "1 in 8 Meaningful-success odds." That's not a thing you put on a product page unless you're either very confident or very weird, and I respect both. ## Where I paused "Honest disclosure: we don't have live customers on this idea yet. We shipped the strategy package; you ship the customer conversations." I read that three times. Because the page also has a "Try it Live" button and talks about real-time intent scoring and buying committee mapping like those are working features. So I genuinely do not know: is there a tool here, or is there a dossier about how you could build a tool? The page treats those as one thing and they are not the same thing. ## What I distrusted The axes scores: "pain intensity: 10/10, buyer clarity: 10/10, distribution ease: 10/10" -- but "financial upside: 1/10." That combination doesn't add up without explanation. If the pain is a 10, the buyer is obvious, and it's easy to distribute, why is the upside a 1? That's either a really important insight buried in the dossier, or it's a scoring system that isn't calibrated correctly yet, or the Fermi math is punishing the category because it's already won by ZoomInfo and Sales Navigator and Apollo. Any of those explanations would change how I think about this. None of them are on the page. Also: "Intent Scoring AI ranks decision makers by engagement likelihood based on company news, role signals, and activity patterns." I've implemented three tools that say exactly that sentence. I need to know what makes this one different, not what category it's in. ## What would convince me Show me one data pull. Not a demo video -- a screenshot of actual output for a real company (anonymized is fine) where the "engagement likelihood" score meant something that Apollo or Sales Nav missed. If this is scoring based on signals those tools don't ingest, name one signal and explain why it moves the needle. I'd also want to know what's actually in the $5 dossier versus the $99 adopt package -- the feature list is vague enough that I can't tell if the code starter is a weekend hack or something I'd actually deploy. ## What I'd ask in an email reply 1. The "financial upside: 1/10" is the most interesting number on the page. Is that because the category is too crowded to win on differentiation, or because margins are bad, or something else? That one score is doing a lot of work and I can't reverse-engineer it from what's here. 2. What does the working code starter actually cover? Is it an API wrapper, a scraper, a prompting layer over a data vendor? "Working code starter" could mean a lot of things and the difference matters for how fast I could take this to a first customer. 3. Has anyone adopted this and reported back? Even one conversation would tell me more than the Fermi estimate. ## Verdict: on-the-fence The radical honesty about odds and negative year-1 take-home is legitimately interesting and I don't see it anywhere else. But the page conflates "this tool exists" with "here is a dossier for building this tool" and I still don't know which one I'm looking at. --- *Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-06-05. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*