# Marcus Tran, Head of Operations at Meridian Outreach — read of RekinderScore, May 15 2026

> 7 years running a LinkedIn-first lead gen agency, currently managing 6 inboxers and about 2,200 active prospect threads at any given time. We're a Sales Connector shop top to bottom.

## How I got here

Got tagged in a Sales Connector community Slack by one of my inboxers who said "have you seen this." She was asking because she's drowning. We've been manually triaging stale threads every Monday morning for two years and I've been quietly shopping for something to fix it. So I clicked. I have maybe 9 minutes before my next call.

## What I clicked first

"The Megan Problem: 400-500 stale conversations land in the inboxing team each week." I stopped there. That's my number. That's my team's number. Whoever wrote this has sat in a Monday standup where someone is staring at a spreadsheet of 400 threads trying to figure out who's still warm. The fact that they gave it a name and quantified it was the first signal this wasn't written by a generic SaaS copywriter.

The "15-20 hottest prospects" framing is also smart. My team doesn't need a better spreadsheet. They need a short list.

## Where I paused

The scoring FAQ answer is the most technically honest thing on the page: "If your team has successfully revived threads with similar signals 60 percent of the time, a new thread with those signals gets a higher score." That's actually a real description of what a model like this would do. I paused because most pages like this just say "AI-powered" and walk away. This one tried to explain the loop. I appreciated it even if I'm still skeptical about whether it works.

## What I distrusted

"Every inboxing team reports the same thing: they stop guessing and start closing." Who is reporting this? How many teams? This is the kind of sentence that sounds like social proof but carries zero weight. There's no name, no number, no before-and-after. "70 percent time savings reported" -- same problem. Reported by whom? One pilot customer? A survey of 4 people?

Then I hit the bottom of the page and found this: "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 read that twice. This is not a product. This is a pitch deck dressed as a product page. The pricing table, the "Start Trial" buttons, the "You'll get your first daily shortlist by tomorrow morning" -- none of that is real. This is someone selling the blueprint to BUILD this thing. The whole page is written in the present tense as if the software exists. That's not bold. That's misleading.

The Wishdeal Factory scoring block is also bizarre. "Financial upside: 1/10." You're showing me a box on your own product page that says the financial upside is 1 out of 10. I genuinely do not know what to do with that.

## What would convince me

If the product existed, I'd want one screenshot of an actual daily shortlist inside Sales Connector with real (anonymized) prospect names, a confidence score, and a suggested angle. Not a mockup. The suggested angles claim is the most interesting part of the whole page and there's zero example of what one actually looks like. "Reference a past deal, flag a business change they might face, or invoke a mutual connection" -- show me one. Write out the actual message. Let me judge whether it's better than what my team writes by hand.

If this is genuinely a build-it-yourself package being sold to agency owners or operators who want to ship this as their own product, that's a completely different conversation and the page is targeting the wrong person.

## What I'd ask in an email reply

1. Is this live software I can trial, or am I buying a build spec? The page is genuinely confusing on this. The "Start Trial" button and the "no live customers yet" disclosure are at war with each other.
2. If I'm buying the build spec -- what exactly is in the package? Code scaffolding, prompt templates, training data schema? What does "shipped the strategy package" mean in concrete terms?
3. The model retrains on "your team's data" -- at $399/month on the Team plan, where is that compute happening and who maintains the training pipeline after I deploy?

## Verdict: on-the-fence

The pain point is real and described well. If this were a live product, I'd be in the trial already. But I can't tell if I'm being asked to buy software or buy a business idea, and by the time I hit the fine print I felt tricked by the present-tense framing on everything above it.

---
*Memo by skeptic persona, generated 2026-05-15. Studio breaks own self-grading loop.*