Hlib S.

Hlib S.Sep 13, 2026

I always practice what I preach about success. Today, before noon: → Woke at 4:47am (slept in) → Read 400 pages → Hyrox in 40 minutes → Cold plunge, obviously → Booked 50 demos for clients → Closed a Series B for a company I don't work at → Bragged about all of it on LinkedIn Only one of these is true. Guess which one. P.S. on my way to meet investors now

Hlib S.Sep 16, 2026

We charge mostly per realised meeting. The meeting has to actually happen before we invoice for it. Sounds like a small distinction. It changes how we work every day. Booked meetings are easy to manufactureL Any agency can hit a booking number. Push hard enough on the phone and people will say yes to end the conversation. Then half of them don't show up, And the client paid for a calendar full of nothing. A no-show can cost us money too: That one change lines up our incentives with yours. → Is this actually the decision maker → Do they actually have the problem → Did they say yes because they meant it → Will they still care on Thursday When a no-show hits our invoice, We stop booking meetings that were always going to be no-shows. What it changes for the client: You pay for outcomes. Not hours, not emails sent, not a monthly activity report nobody reads. It also makes the maths simple. You know what a meeting costs you, So you know within a month whether this channel works for your business. Where this model is worse: I'd rather say it than have you find out. → It makes us pickier: If your TAM is tiny or the buyer is nearly impossible to reach, We're taking real risk and we'll say no. → It needs your side to hold up their end: If your team reschedules constantly, the numbers get messy. → It doesn't suit companies who want us to experiment freely: We're optimising for meetings that happen, s So we're less likely to chase a weird angle that might be brilliant. Pay-per-realised works when both sides want the same thing. How does your agency bill you? Booked, realised or just retainer?

Hlib S.Sep 14, 2026

We booked 24 meetings last week for a sales tech client. Almost all of them from the phone. What I keep thinking about is what we learned in the first week. Calling answers in days what email answers in weeks Email tells you what happened: Reply rate up, reply rate down, okay, but why? You can't hear hesitation in a reply rate. Put callers on a new client on day one and by Friday you know: → Which objection keeps coming up → Which title actually engages and which one is just polite → What words they use for their own problem → Where people stop listening All of that came out of 200 conversations in one week. Then you scale the thing you just learned. This is the part people get super wrong. They spend six weeks A/B testing subject lines To find out what a caller could have told them on Tuesday. We call first, find the angle, Then push volume through email and LinkedIn once we know what's landing. Nothing changed, besides that you just stopped paying for guesses. It also works from day one: Email needs domains warmed and sequences built. Calling needs a list and a phone. You can be in real conversations before your infrastructure is even ready. That's why month one doesn't have to be dead time. Shoutout to our cold calling team. Half of what we know about our clients' markets came from them. How fast do you find out your targeting is wrong?