# Tom Breckenridge, Sales Ops Manager at Kortex Industrial (210 employees) — read of Decision Maker Finder AI, May 21, 2026

> 11 years in B2B revenue ops, currently wrangling a 14-person SDR team and a tech stack that costs more than my mortgage: ZoomInfo, Apollo, Sales Nav, Outreach, and a Salesforce instance held together with duct tape and a consultant's prayers.

## How I got here

Googled "AI tool to find decision makers B2B" because our ZoomInfo renewal quote came in $34k higher than last year and I told my VP I'd find something leaner before I'd approve it. This showed up on page two. Clicked it. My daughter's softball game starts in 40 minutes so I was skimming fast.

## What I clicked first

The hero has "Find the Right Person to Sell To" and a "Try it Live" button. That got me. I clicked expecting a demo of an actual product. What I got instead was the phrase "Honest disclosure: we don't have live customers on this idea yet." Full stop. Read that three times.

## Where I paused

The Fermi math section. "$-27,000 Year-1 take-home" and "1 in 8 meaningful-success odds." I had to re-read the whole page from scratch because I suddenly understood I was not reading a product page. I was reading a pitch to someone who wants to BUILD this product. Which is not me. I want to buy a tool, not fund or build one. The page never told me that. I had to figure it out from the fine print.

## What I distrusted

The features read like a real product: "Intent Scoring AI," "Buying Committee Mapping," "Real-Time Updates." These are written in present tense, active voice, as if this thing exists and is running. Then buried in a score card below the fold: "We shipped the strategy package; you ship the customer conversations." That's a pretty significant thing to hide that far down. "Adopt the build $99-$199" means I'd be buying starter code and brand assets for a product that has no customers. The feature bullets are describing a vision, not a product. That's bait-and-switch vibes, even if unintentional.

Also: "Built by Wishdeal Studio" appears after a section that scores this idea 1/10 on "financial upside." Why is the studio that built the idea also the one scoring it? They disclosed it, which I respect, but the conflict doesn't go away just because you name it.

## What would convince me

Nothing would convince me of anything, because I came to the wrong store. I wanted a product. This is a franchise kit for a product that nobody has validated yet. If I were evaluating it as a BUILD opportunity: show me one cold email reply from a prospect, one LinkedIn message that got a response, one person who paid $5 and came back. "We don't have live customers" is honest, but it also means there's nothing here to evaluate except the idea itself. The "1 in 8" odds being surfaced prominently is refreshing, but it makes me trust the product less, not more.

## What I'd ask in an email reply

1. The feature list describes Intent Scoring, Buying Committee Mapping, Real-Time Updates as if they work right now. Do any of these features exist in working form, or is this the scope for whoever buys the $99 build kit?
2. Who is the actual customer for this page? A sales team wanting to buy a tool, or an operator wanting to build one? Because the page pitches both and I genuinely could not tell for the first 90 seconds.
3. "Operate with us, custom" at the bottom sounds like you'd build and run this for me. What does that actually mean in practice, and what's the price range?

## Verdict: dismissive

Not because the idea is bad. Finding decision makers is a real problem and I'd pay for a tool that actually did it. But this page made me work too hard to understand that it's not selling me a tool, it's selling me the idea for one. I left more confused than when I arrived, and I've got a softball game to catch.

---
*Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-05-21. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*