Some of the work I do for clients extends to drafting Letters of Introduction (LOI) for them to use as a cold email or introduction on LinkedIn. The general principles behind crafting such letters is to keep them brief (like five sentences long), focused on the interests of the receiving party, and not to attempt to sell on the spot.
Rarely do people get all the above right. Instead of starting with LOIs to ease into gauging interests, they tend to move directly into pitches, and many of those are the opposite of intriguing.
I recently put up a post on LinkedIn about red flags in cold pitches. Someone seems to have mistaken that as an invitation. Today I saw an Inmail that ticks most of the boxes for how not to message me.
This message came from someone who describes himself as a content writer and ghostwriter hitting up someone who also offers exactly those services for potential work. Here's the screenshot:
Shooting yourself in the foot from the opening
The person claiming writing expertise already gets everything he could get wrong in just the opening with "Hello Mr. Ariella Phd."
I have 3 strong objections plus one more nitpicky one.
1. Why assume Mr.?
2. Why not use my last name that is listed before the the PhD?
3. Why show that you don't know what a PhD means by treating it as a last name and not using it to come up with a gender-neutral title of Dr.?
4. In direct address, you really should have a comma between the Hello and the name. I know very few people bother with that for emailed messages, but a professional writer should still know that.
Using cliches and vague terms
It doesn't really get better after that. After the "Good Day!" greeting, the writer goes on to say, "I'm asking for a few seconds of your valuable time to offer my content writing expertise in your endeavor to keep the industry thriving."
1. You can't literally mean just a few seconds of my time, as that wouldn't suffice for your pitch.
2. What do you think is my "endeavor," and which industry do you have in mind with the definite article?
Not showing an understanding of the recipient's perspective
The next sentence is: "It will be my pleasure to get the chance for a progressive discussion with you."
Of course it will be your pleasure. You're the one reaching out to me to try to pitch your services, so you assume it will be beneficial -- "progressive" not the right word in this context -- for you. But that's hardly a point to convince me to hear you.
Needless to say, I didn't respond.
Related:
Posts
