# Chris Pallotta, VP of Sales Development at TechHarbor -- read of RekinderScore, May 24, 2026

> 10 years in SDR and BDR leadership, currently managing a 14-person outbound team at a 60-person RevOps consulting firm outside Chicago. Our whole growth motion runs through LinkedIn.

## How I got here

We did our Q1 post-mortem two weeks ago. My team flagged LinkedIn thread management as their single biggest time drain: 3-4 hours a week, every rep, just deciding who to ping again. I Googled "stale LinkedIn thread scoring tool" and hit a Reddit thread where someone was skeptical of this product in a way that felt honest. I clicked the link mostly because I trusted the skeptic.

## What I clicked first

"Pick up the lead before someone else does." Sharp. Then: "Every night, RekinderScore surfaces the 15-20 hottest prospects to rekindle from your stale LinkedIn threads. With suggested angles. Zero manual triage." I read that twice because it describes our exact problem exactly. Then I hit "The Megan Problem" and actually said "huh" out loud. Naming it landed. "Manually sorting 'who should we follow up with' against 'whose deal has moved on' is a tax on your best people." That sentence is doing real work.

## Where I paused

The suggested angles section. "Not canned, not generic, not 'just checking in.'" I want to see one. A screenshot. A redacted example. Is the angle "saw you just raised a Series B" (which my team already does manually) or is it something genuinely smarter? The page tells me it's not generic. It does not prove it. That gap is meaningful.

## What I distrusted

"Every inboxing team reports the same thing: they stop guessing and start closing." Every inboxing team. No names, no company, no LinkedIn handle to go look up. Then: "70 percent time savings reported." Reported by whom? One internal run? Three friends in beta? I have no idea.

Then I hit this near the bottom:

"Honest disclosure: we don't have live customers on this idea yet. We shipped the strategy package; you ship the customer conversations."

I had to reread that paragraph three times. This is not a product. This is a business idea brief that someone built a product-looking website around. The pricing tiers at $399 and $1,299 a month are hypothetical. The FAQ answers are for features that have not shipped. The customer testimonial framing ("every inboxing team reports") is describing a future customer base that does not exist.

The whole page presents as a live SaaS and then the fine print tells you it is a blueprint.

Also, they score their own idea and publish the scores: "financial upside: 1/10" and "1 in 8 Meaningful-success odds (Fermi)." I respect the transparency in a weird way, but that data is for someone thinking about building this, not buying it. The Fermi estimate says the builder loses money in year one. I kept having to remind myself which side of this transaction I was supposed to be on.

## What would convince me

If the product existed: three named customers with before and after numbers. Not "a fintech team in Austin." Real names. How many threads were in the hopper, how many did the model flag as high-signal, how many actually replied when the team reached out. That chain is what I'm buying. "70 percent time savings" tells me nothing because time savings on what baseline, measured how.

And one real suggested angle output. Screenshot it, blur the names, show me the structure and the reasoning. Right now "Angles are pattern-matched from successful past replies" is a sentence that could mean anything from GPT-3 templating to something genuinely clever.

## What I'd ask in an email reply

1. The whole product appears to live inside Sales Connector. We use Salesloft. Is there any path to this working for teams outside that ecosystem, or is this fundamentally a Sales Connector native feature?

2. The disclosure says you shipped a strategy package and the customer conversations are on us. Who is this page actually written for -- someone who wants to use the product, or someone who wants to build and sell it? Because the CTA buttons say "Start Free Trial" and the small print says the product does not exist. That is a confusing page to land on.

3. The scoring model is supposed to retrain weekly on my team's reply rates. What is the minimum viable history to get a useful first shortlist? We have about 18 months of LinkedIn data but none of it is in Sales Connector.

## Verdict: dismissive

The problem framing is the clearest I have read on a page like this and "The Megan Problem" naming convention is legitimately smart positioning. But this is a strategy package dressed as a product page. If they come back when real customers are using it and one of them has a name I can Google, I would read that version with genuine interest.

---
*Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-05-24. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*