Dan Gershenson works in brand strategy and content marketing. Gershenson's posts cover practical CRM choices, outbound sales, and website SEO, with an emphasis on connecting marketing work to business goals.
Dan Gershenson is most useful for practical CRM, outbound sales, and SEO advice tied to business goals.
Best for
B2B SaaS campaigns about CRM adoption, outbound pipeline, and content that proves value upfront.
Not for
Campaigns wanting feature comparison matrices, volume-based outbound proof, or gated lead capture.
Key takeaways
Choose a CRM your team will still use in 90 days, not the most features.
Judge outsourced sales development on pipeline, not meetings booked.
Treat SEO issues as triage tied to business goals, not every alert.
Check first: Confirm audience geography, job roles, and whether any paid relationship exists.
Main ideas
Pick the CRM your team will still be using in 90 days, not the one with the most features · Judge an outsourced sales development agency on pipeline, not on meetings booked · Treat SEO issues as a triage exercise tied to business goals, not a chase after every alert
Dan Gershenson works in brand strategy and content marketing.
Their posts connect marketing and sales decisions to practical business outcomes: choose tools a team will actually use, judge sales activity by the pipeline it creates, and prioritize website fixes by their importance.
They also argue that useful content should prove its value upfront, rather than tease it behind another offer.
Their writing is direct and actionable, with occasional deliberately provocative advice—for example, that people should be more open to LinkedIn connection requests without a note.
Gershenson turns familiar business choices into tests readers can apply.
For CRM, they suggest choosing for the three to five outcomes that matter now and for a system people will keep using, rather than being dazzled by features.
For outsourced sales development, they ask whether activity advances pipeline, not merely whether it produces emails or meetings.
For SEO, they separate errors, warnings and notices so a long issue list does not become a reason to panic.
They also challenge marketers to demonstrate value in the content itself and urge openness to new connections—even when the invitation has no note.
Together, these ideas make their work useful for small-business owners and marketers weighing tools, vendors, priorities and how they earn an audience’s attention.
Dan Gershenson's recurring argument is that business tools and marketing tactics should be judged by whether people keep using them and whether they generate revenue — not by how impressive they look.
Read more
Across the posts reviewed, that test applies to CRM software, outsourced sales development, website SEO, and content offers.
In each case, Gershenson identifies what looks good on a dashboard or feature list, then argues for a plainer measure: a tool a small team still opens after 90 days, an agency that moves pipeline rather than books meetings, an audit that fixes what visitors feel, and content that shows its substance instead of withholding it behind another click.
A second thread concerns relationships and access: give strangers the benefit of the doubt and judge them by what they actually send.
Pick the CRM your team will still be using in 90 days, not the one with the most features
Gershenson argues that feature-heavy CRM platforms suit people who enjoy data and automation, not small business owners and sales teams with real goals.
Read more
The pattern is abandonment: weak onboarding, slow support, prices that climb with usage, hard-to-find features, and new releases that arrive faster than users can build habits.
The recommendation is to identify the three to five things a business needs from a system right now, choose something practical that can be working within about five business days, and accept a few non-core quirks.
Success means continuing to use the tool.
Gershenson says they use Pipedrive, speaks favorably of Monday CRM and Zoho, and deliberately declines to run a full comparison.
The post lists why people quit: "Their onboarding sucks.
Their customer service sucks.
Their pricing sucks in that the more you use it, the more you pay...
Getting answers means waiting until later today or tomorrow because the AI Agent named Mary can't answer jack."
The proposed fix is to "think about what's practical and easy while addressing the 3-5 most important things you want to get out of a system right now," within five business days, so users do what most people never do — keep using it.
An earlier, shorter post makes the same practical point about marketing and sales: the two functions should not operate in separate silos, and cross-training keeps conversations aligned from the first exchange. It also announces a Pipedrive Essentials for Sales Reps certification, linking product knowledge to that alignment argument rather than presenting it as a separate credential.
Judge an outsourced sales development agency on pipeline, not on meetings booked
Gershenson sees a mismatch: agencies sell volume promises while teams need conversations that generate revenue.
Read more
Emails sent, calls made, and meetings booked can look strong on paper while the pipeline stays weak.
Before signing, they advise checking for warning signs — guaranteed meeting counts, vague case studies, and a 12-month timeline to results — and evaluating vendors on pipeline progression instead.
Better signals include trigger-based outreach tied to real buying intent, such as hiring, funding, and job postings, and whether the vendor will work inside the client's own CRM and sales process.
Gershenson says outsourcing can work for a team with no outbound playbook that is running parallel experiments and focusing on signal-driven outreach.
Rather than speak generally about quality, Gershenson names operators they consider credible — John McLeod, Jay Ryan, Lee McKnight Jr, and Doug Rawady — and contrasts them with agencies that hide behind activity metrics.
The post also says 67% of companies report failure with outsourced SDR efforts and 94% of buying groups rank their shortlist before talking to sales, making timing and relevance more important than brute-force volume.
Treat SEO issues as a triage exercise tied to business goals, not a chase after every alert
Gershenson uses the agency website as a case study, treating it like a car in the garage rather than a set-and-forget asset.
Read more
A high issue count need not cause alarm because severity varies: errors are most critical, warnings matter, and notices are nice to address.
Cleanup should serve visitor experience and business goals, not chase every new alert — what the post calls "SEO Whack-A-Mole."
Agencies should monitor and address these issues over time rather than declare the site finished.
The site's health score is 82, with a goal of 90-plus through greater authority and fewer errors. Faced with 754 total issues, Gershenson uses a short on-camera chapter breakdown — "754 Issues Without Panic," "Errors Warnings Notices Explained," and "Prioritizing Critical Fixes" — to show how to separate urgent fixes from those that can wait.
Stop withholding value behind a download, webinar, or click — prove it in the thing people already opted into
Gershenson argues that recycled sign-up pitches have created offer fatigue.
Read more
Courses, speaking engagements, webinars, and networking events all demand time, effort, or money before showing value, while newsletters tease a short snippet and send readers elsewhere for the actual content.
The problem isn't selling; it's asking an audience to commit before showing proof.
The alternative is to give away the how, the why, and the next step up front, and make any ask easy to decline.
Gershenson points to the Crawl Space videos as an example of hiding nothing, contrasting them with the pattern they object to: "I saw X problem, I saw a way to fix it and you'll discover the secrets when you download this or come to that." The post offers help building stronger offers while making clear there's no commitment required — "I don't need you to commit to anything right now" — and directs interested viewers to the agency's YouTube channel.
Give strangers the benefit of the doubt rather than treating a blank connection request as an insult
Gershenson pushes back on the idea that LinkedIn invitations without a personal note are offensive.
Read more
The argument: a note's presence or absence says little about the sender's character and more about how easily the recipient is rattled.
Shutting down a conversation before it begins repeats the mistake of complaining that strangers connect without knowing you.
Gershenson says they accept invitations by default and let the other person prove themselves in their next message; the real problem is a copied-and-pasted pitch.
They deliberately curate connections toward people they would actually meet, work with, or hire, and label contacts in a CRM by what they do.
The point lands in a single line: "It's the 1 request you delete too early that could be your next referral partner, prospect, coach or colleague putting out great insights."
Gershenson acknowledges the frustration of fielding pitches from strangers — "Sorry if 99 people are pitching you right off the bat.
That sucks.
Now get over it" — but treats that annoyance as a trade-off to manage, not a reason to shut people out.
Together, these posts make a consistent case: judge people and offers by their substance, not their approach. One post recommends accepting a connection and deciding after the pitch; the other, showing the substance before asking for anything.
This is Gershenson's clearest statement of a practical, anti-overengineering stance.
Read more
A newcomer asking, "should I buy the most powerful CRM or the one my team will still be using in 90 days?" gets a direct answer.
Gershenson argues that the most complex CRM platforms are built for "data and automation geeks who like generating reports" rather than small business owners with real business goals.
The post lists a familiar failure pattern: poor onboarding and customer service, pricing that rises with usage, hard-to-find features, support that makes you wait until "later today or tomorrow," and a stream of releases that outpaces any habit of use.
The recommendation: choose a system based on the three to five things that matter most right now, within the next five business days, and reach the outcome most people never do—keep using the CRM.
Gershenson discloses using Pipedrive and says the point is the category of need, not a comparison rabbit hole.
For brands planning a campaign
A partnership message can center on adoption and staying power rather than a feature checklist. Pipedrive-aligned messaging would fit naturally: the post discloses a personal tool choice, not a paid relationship.
This answers the buyer question, "is this SDR agency legitimate?" with checks readers can apply before signing—more useful than a general opinion about outsourcing.
Read more
Gershenson frames the problem as a mismatch: agencies sell meetings, while buyers need pipeline.
The post cites 67% of companies reporting failure with outsourced SDR efforts and 94% of buying groups ranking a shortlist before ever speaking to sales.
It names red flags that predict a bad contract, including guaranteed meeting counts, vague case studies, and a 12-month timeline to results.
It argues for judging an agency on pipeline progression rather than emails sent, calls made, and meetings booked.
Gershenson also names operators they consider credible and describes where outsourcing can work: a team with no outbound playbook that wants parallel experiments and runs signal-driven outreach tied to hiring, funding, and job postings.
For brands planning a campaign
The strongest angle is vendor evaluation for a sales-development or outbound tool. A campaign funded by an SDR agency would carry an obvious sponsorship risk, given the subject.
It answers, "I have hundreds of SEO warnings; which ones matter first?" and shows the prioritization method on the author's own site, making it inspectable rather than abstract.
Read more
Gershenson audits their own agency site, reporting a health score of 82 and a goal of 90+, and treats 754 total issues as a triage problem rather than a panic event.
The post ranks errors as most critical, warnings as important, and notices as nice to address.
Agencies, it argues, should monitor and treat these issues over time rather than set and forget.
It contrasts a real marketing plan with "SEO Whack-A-Mole" and ties cleanup to visitor experience and business goals.
For brands planning a campaign
Useful for SEO tooling or audit-service partnerships focused on triage and ongoing monitoring, not a one-time fix. The post includes chapter markers but doesn't say what's on screen, so don't make claims about it.
This answers a recurring etiquette and prospecting question with a position many readers disagree with, making it a good entry point to Gershenson's thinking about relationships and openness.
Read more
Gershenson argues that a blank connection request isn't a verdict on the sender's character and that rejecting it mainly reveals how easily the recipient is rattled.
They accept requests by default and let the other person prove themselves with a copied-and-pasted pitch, if that's what they send.
The goal is to be a good connector to people they would actually have lunch with, labeling contacts in a CRM by what they do.
The closing point: the request deleted too early could have come from a referral partner, prospect, coach, or colleague.
For brands planning a campaign
Relevant to LinkedIn outreach and networking tools, but buyers who expect personalized first contact may push back. A campaign should take a side in that debate, not pretend it doesn't exist.
It answers, "why are my LinkedIn offers getting ignored?" with a testable change: put the substance in the thing people already opted into, not behind another click.
Read more
Gershenson calls out the recycled LinkedIn pitch: describe a problem, then withhold the fix behind a download, webinar, event, or newsletter click.
The complaint isn't about selling but about the order of operations: audiences are asked for time, effort, or money before seeing proof.
The proposed correction is to stop teasing value and start proving it.
Gershenson points to their own "Crawl Space" videos as an example of sharing the how, the why, and the next step with nothing hidden.
The post closes by asking readers to subscribe to Caliber Brand Strategy + Content Marketing's YouTube channel.
For brands planning a campaign
A natural fit for a content, newsletter, or video-partner campaign built on demonstrating expertise in public. The post includes a video link but doesn't describe its content, so focus on the written argument.
It answers a small but concrete question about the author's working knowledge: here, the CRM and alignment themes meet in a documented credential rather than an opinion.
Read more
A short post announces completion of Pipedrive Essentials for Sales Reps.
Its argument: marketing and sales shouldn't operate in separate silos; cross-training is vital to aligned conversations and should be an ongoing habit, not a one-time course.
It's the thinnest of the six pieces: a certification notice with hashtags and a brief comment.
For brands planning a campaign
Little campaign weight on its own; it supports, rather than leads, a pitch about marketing and sales alignment. Ask for details before treating the certification as evidence of a commercial relationship with Pipedrive.
Video-led explainers built around first-person experience6
Choosing a CRM small teams will actually keep using1
Cross-training marketing and sales instead of running separate silos1
Judging outsourced sales development on pipeline, not booked meetings1
Openness to connection requests as a prospecting mindset1
Treating website SEO as business prioritization, not whack-a-mole1
Offer fatigue and proving value before asking for commitment1
Choosing a CRM small teams will actually keep using
Dan Gershenson argues that complex CRM platforms are built for data and automation enthusiasts, not small business owners and sales teams with real goals.
Read more
The failure pattern they describe is abandonment after 30 to 90 days: poor onboarding, slow support, rising costs as usage grows, hard-to-find features and new releases that outpace established habits.
Their recommendation is to define the three to five things a business needs from a system right now and choose something practical that can be working within about five business days.
Continuing to use the tool matters more than checking every box.
They say plainly that they use Pipedrive, note positive things about Monday CRM and Zoho, and deliberately decline a full comparison.
Leads with the buying failure—sustained use—rather than a feature checklist, and discloses their own tool choice so readers don’t mistake the advice for neutral vendor guidance.
For brands planning a campaign
A CRM or sales-tooling brand could brief practical adoption content on onboarding friction, time-to-value and choosing a system a small team will keep using. A brief demanding exhaustive feature-by-feature comparisons cuts against the stated choice to avoid that rabbit hole.
Cross-training marketing and sales instead of running separate silos
Dan Gershenson argues that marketing and sales shouldn’t operate as separate silos; cross-training lets conversations start with both sides already aligned.
Read more
The same post announces a Pipedrive Essentials for Sales Reps certification, grounding the alignment argument in hands-on product familiarity rather than abstract advice.
For brands planning a campaign
A brand could use this angle for content about revenue-team alignment or practitioner-led training. The evidence here is thin—one short post and a credential mention—so ask for more examples before building a full module on this theme.
Judging outsourced sales development on pipeline, not booked meetings
Dan Gershenson explains how to distinguish genuine outsourced SDR operators from agencies hiding behind activity metrics.
Read more
The core mismatch: buyers purchase volume promises, while teams need conversations that turn into revenue.
Emails sent, calls made and meetings booked can look strong while the pipeline stays weak.
Warning signs include guaranteed meeting counts, vague case studies and a 12-month path to results.
Better evaluation looks at pipeline progression, trigger-based outreach tied to real buying signals such as hiring, funding and job postings, and whether a vendor will work inside the client’s CRM and sales process.
They also describe where outsourcing can work: teams without an outbound playbook, running experiments in parallel and focused on signal-driven outreach.
Frames the decision as a diagnostic readers can run against vendors, naming specific red flags and operators rather than speaking generally about quality.
For brands planning a campaign
Strong brief territory for outbound, lead-generation or sales-data brands: vendor selection criteria, pipeline-quality measurement and intent signals. The post cites 67% failure and 94% shortlist figures without sourcing; ask for the underlying source before repeating them as fact.
Openness to connection requests as a prospecting mindset
Dan Gershenson pushes back on the common complaint that LinkedIn invitations without a personal note are offensive.
Read more
The argument: a note’s presence or absence says little about the sender’s character and more about how easily the recipient is rattled.
Eliminating a conversation before it starts, they say, is like complaining that strangers connect without knowing you.
Their practice is to give people the benefit of the doubt, accept and judge the follow-up; a copied-and-pasted pitch is the real problem.
They describe curating connections deliberately and labeling people in a CRM by what they do, aiming to connect with people they would actually meet, hire or work with.
They acknowledge that people receiving pitches from many strangers face real frustration, and treat the annoyance as a trade-off to manage rather than a reason to close off.
For brands planning a campaign
Useful for a brief about relationship-first prospecting, connection hygiene and how CRM notes support a personal network. A brand whose messaging leans on anti-spam or strict personalization rules should expect this position to complicate, not support, that framing.
Treating website SEO as business prioritization, not whack-a-mole
Dan Gershenson uses their own agency website as the working example, treating it like a car in the garage rather than a set-and-forget asset.
Read more
The site has a health score of 82, with a goal of 90-plus through better authority and fewer errors for visitors.
They explain why 754 total issues shouldn’t trigger panic: severity varies.
Errors are critical, warnings are important and notices are nice to address, so the work is about triage toward business goals, not chasing every alert.
Their position is that agencies should monitor and keep treating these issues over time.
The post is a short on-camera walkthrough with timestamped chapters.
Uses their own site as the specimen, states the score openly and separates errors, warnings and notices so readers can prioritize work rather than react to the volume.
For brands planning a campaign
Good fit for SEO, site-health or marketing-operations brands seeking prioritization frameworks and candid agency-side examples. There’s a conflict risk: Dan Gershenson runs a content marketing agency, so a tooling brief positioning the vendor against agencies wouldn’t sit comfortably with this material.
Offer fatigue and proving value before asking for commitment
Dan Gershenson argues that recycled sign-up pitches have created offer fatigue: courses, webinars, speaking slots and networking events all ask for time, effort or money before showing anything.
Read more
Newsletters get the same treatment, teasing a snippet and sending readers elsewhere for the actual content.
Their counter-position is to stop teasing value and start proving it.
They point to their own Crawl Space videos as an example of showing the how, why and what next without a gate.
They also offer help building stronger offers while explicitly releasing the reader from any commitment, and direct interested viewers to their agency’s YouTube channel.
For brands planning a campaign
Directly relevant to a B2B SaaS content partnership: this position endorses ungated, proof-first content. A campaign built on gated assets or a long nurture sequence should expect this stance to work against the offer.
Video-led explainers built around first-person experience
Across Dan Gershenson’s posts, the recurring format is a written post that frames a problem and points to an on-camera video, including a recurring Crawl Space series and their agency’s YouTube channel.
Read more
Topics include CRM choice, outsourced SDR evaluation, website SEO triage and offer strategy.
The through-line is first-person experience: their own CRM, site audit and video series.
Posts are short, direct and conversational, with hashtags for reach and links to the video or channel.
Problem framing in the post text, demonstration in the linked video and a first-person example rather than abstract advice.
For brands planning a campaign
A campaign aimed at a specific audience should treat video plus supporting post text as the native unit of work, not a standalone article. The linked videos aren’t available in the posts; ask for the actual footage before committing to a campaign that relies on its specific content.
Dan Gershenson's work is easiest to explore through short LinkedIn posts that pair a written argument with a video walkthrough.
Read more
The through-line is practical judgment: pick the CRM a team will still use, judge outsourced SDRs on pipeline rather than meetings booked, tie SEO triage to business goals, and prove value instead of withholding it behind a download.
Start with the CRM post for the clearest statement of that test, then the outsourced SDR post for its application to vendor choice and the offer-fatigue post for the content-marketing side.
The posts are first-person and opinionated, often using their own tools, website, or videos as examples.
Morgan J Ingram's posts also center on sales development and outbound prospecting, including a first-person account of turning around an SDR role through event-based prospecting and a step-by-step guide to becoming a top rep.
Read more
Like Gershenson, Ingram teaches from personal experience and gives specific, actionable steps rather than abstract advice.
Ingram focuses on SDR skill-building and event strategy, while Gershenson more often evaluates vendors, tools, and marketing choices from a buyer's or agency owner's perspective. Their CRM and outsourced-SDR posts ask how to judge a product or partner; Ingram's ask how an individual rep should operate.
Alex Vacca's posts share Gershenson's emphasis on pipeline over activity metrics and signal-based outbound.
Read more
Both argue that meetings booked or emails sent can look good while the pipeline stays weak, and recommend starting with buying signals such as hiring, funding, or job changes.
Vacca presents detailed, layered GTM systems with named tools, metrics, and campaign examples, while Gershenson tends to write shorter evaluative posts about choosing a CRM, judging an outsourced SDR agency, or fixing SEO priorities. Vacca's material is more operational and tactical; Gershenson's focuses on practical judgment and relationship mindset.
Josh Tay, like Gershenson, writes as a marketing agency practitioner who teaches from firsthand experience.
Read more
Tay describes building agency teams, training junior members, and creating systems with minimal downside; Gershenson draws on their agency website and client-facing work to explain SEO triage and offer strategy.
Tay covers retention marketing, email and SMS incrementality, and DTC brand performance, while Gershenson covers CRM selection, outbound sales, SEO, and content offers for B2B and small-business audiences. Tay's posts often dig into analytics and agency operations; Gershenson's focus on marketing and sales tooling choices and evaluating claims.
Dan Gershenson writes about practical CRM choices, prospecting, outsourced sales development, and marketing that demonstrates value upfront, making their content relevant to campaigns aimed at B2B SaaS buyers interested in CRM and outbound sales strategy.
Read more
To assess audience fit, ask for recent LinkedIn audience geography and job-role data, plus documented audience survey results or another source showing employer, occupation, or seniority.
Dan Gershenson's six posts do not describe a partnership program: none states sponsor terms, a rate card, a media kit, a sponsored-placement format or an inquiry address, and no branded collaboration is disclosed as paid.
Read more
Companies appear mainly as tools and topics: they describe using Pipedrive for CRM, hold a Pipedrive Essentials for Sales Reps certification, discuss how outsourced SDR agencies sell meetings rather than pipeline, and tag one video post with a CRM vendor hashtag.
The visible commercial activity is their own content-marketing agency and YouTube channel, not third-party sponsorship inventory.
Buyers should ask directly about availability, scope, deliverables, disclosure and pricing; no published terms appear in the posts.
A strong fit is a B2B SaaS company selling CRM or outbound tooling to small and mid-sized sales teams, where the pitch is adoption and time-to-value rather than feature breadth.
Read more
Dan Gershenson’s most developed argument is that complex CRM platforms fail small teams: onboarding is poor, support is slow, pricing climbs with usage, features are hard to find, and releases outpace users’ habits, so people abandon the tool after 30 to 90 days.
The recommendation: define the three to five things a business needs right now and choose a tool that can be working within about five business days, because continued use beats checking every box.
Gershenson says they use Pipedrive and deliberately avoid a full comparison exercise.
That is a personal disclosure of tool choice, not a statement that there is a paid relationship.
A related post connects marketing-and-sales cross-training to hands-on product familiarity through a Pipedrive Essentials for Sales Reps certification.
For a campaign evaluating outbound vendors, the outsourced-SDR piece offers a useful vendor-evaluation frame: buyers purchase volume while teams need pipeline, so emails sent, calls made and meetings booked can look strong even when revenue does not follow.
Better evaluation looks at pipeline progression, trigger-based outreach tied to buying signals such as hiring, funding and job postings, and whether a vendor will work inside the client’s CRM.
The commercial format also fits.
Gershenson’s posts repeatedly pair a written LinkedIn post framing a problem with an on-camera explainer, including a Crawl Space series and the agency’s YouTube channel.
The offer-fatigue post argues for putting substance in front of the audience rather than behind a gate.
A sponsor willing to support an ungated, first-person explainer built around Gershenson’s own CRM and sales process will fit better than one seeking a polish-heavy ad read.
The posts don’t identify the audience’s makeup; ask for audience data if the campaign requires guarantees about who will see the content.
When to choose a specialist
A poor fit is a campaign that wants a feature-comparison matrix, activity-based outbound proof points and a gated lead-capture campaign.
Read more
Each runs against positions the posts state directly.
On comparison content, Gershenson argues that the point is the category of need, not a comparison rabbit hole, and that ultra-robust platforms checking every box are built for data and automation enthusiasts rather than small-business owners.
A campaign built around exhaustive head-to-head feature tables would contradict that argument.
On outbound metrics, the SDR post flags guaranteed meeting counts, vague case studies and a 12-month path to results as danger signals before a contract is signed.
It also argues that emails sent, calls made and meetings booked can all look healthy while the pipeline stays weak.
A vendor selling booked meetings by volume would therefore contradict its own sponsored content.
On gating, the offer-fatigue post criticizes describing a problem while withholding the fix behind a download, webinar or newsletter click, and endorses showing the how, why and next step openly.
A campaign whose central asset sits behind a form would work against the creator’s stated position.
There is also an identity conflict to check before pitching: Gershenson’s posts show that they run a content marketing agency and promote its YouTube channel, so a campaign positioning a platform or service against agencies is unlikely to be credible.
The posts don’t mention partnership terms.
Ask directly about the package, rate card and inquiry process rather than assuming them; their absence from the posts doesn’t mean partnerships are refused.
A worked campaign example
Campaign need: a CRM vendor whose buyers are owner-led sales teams that sign up for a trial, get overwhelmed and stop logging in within a quarter. The goal is adoption and retention messaging, not a feature launch.
Angle: “Five business days to a CRM you will still be using in 90 days.”
Open with the documented abandonment pattern, then narrow to the three to five outcomes a small team should define before choosing a tool.
Show a setup sequence a two-person team can complete in a week, then list what to ignore in the first month because it is not load-bearing.
The point is that continuing to use the system is the outcome most teams never reach—the argument Gershenson already makes without a sponsor.
Since the sponsor sells a CRM and the creator says category choice matters more than comparison, the piece should be honest about where the sponsored product is genuinely the practical option and where it is not.
Readers who spot a paid reversal of a stated position will discount the whole thing.
Deliverables: one on-camera explainer of roughly four to five minutes and one accompanying LinkedIn post carrying the problem framing and linking to the episode, following the format visible in the SEO-audit, SDR-evaluation and offer-fatigue posts.
Send a one-page setup checklist for free, not behind a form, since the offer-fatigue post argues against asking for time or contact details before showing proof.
Distribute through the creator’s LinkedIn account and the agency YouTube channel referenced in the posts.
Handoff: a short internal note for the vendor’s lifecycle team mapping the three-to-five-outcomes framing onto its onboarding emails, so the content yields a usable sequence rather than a one-off video.
Before money moves, negotiate scope, deliverables, disclosure language and pricing directly and agree on them in writing; the posts don’t mention a rate card, media kit or sponsorship terms.
Make the disclosure explicit: this is a topic the creator already covers, and an undeclared sponsorship would undermine credibility.
Ask for the actual video footage from the Crawl Space and related episodes before committing; only post text and descriptions were available for the video posts, so the on-camera style can’t be confirmed from a description.
Agree on how the sponsor will judge success, and ask for audience data on job roles, geography and seniority, which the posts don’t specify.
Choose Morgan J Ingram instead when the sponsorship is about SDR enablement rather than CRM adoption, and the deliverable needs to show a rep or small sales team doing the work.
Read more
The two posts are first-person operating accounts.
One describes nearly quitting an SDR role, pitching leadership on a conference plan, contacting event organizers, printing target lists, working the show floor and ending with 40 meetings booked.
The other lays out a 90-day path to top-rep performance: study case studies and top performers, double call and email volume, ask for coaching, and track sourced opportunities, deal size and the exact messaging that landed.
A vendor selling coaching, sequencing help or field-sales tooling to frontline reps has a closer fit here than with Dan Gershenson, whose material targets the owner or sales leader deciding which system to run.
The tradeoff is scope and buyer altitude.
Morgan J Ingram's posts stay close to a rep's day: activity volume, coaching, event tactics and personal spreadsheets.
They don't evaluate CRM platforms, discuss onboarding and support economics, or weigh tool categories—the substance of Dan Gershenson's most developed post.
For a campaign aimed at small-business owners deciding what to buy and how to keep using it, rep-level content changes the subject.
The conference post also relies on named colleagues and a specific past employer's event, so a sponsor would be buying a personal story rather than a repeatable framework.
Choose Alex Vacca instead when the sponsor is an outbound or GTM infrastructure company and the piece needs to describe a full stack rather than one buying decision.
Read more
The posts lay out a five-part GTM model: AI search visibility, signal-based outbound, founder and employee content, paid ads, and RevOps, with outbound as just one of the five parts.
The second post turns that model into a diagnostic sequence, moving from sending-domain setup through market mapping, signal stacking, channel sync and revenue.
It names tools and metrics along the way, including waterfall enrichment, verified email and mobile providers, reply rates of 5 to 18 percent on signal-stacked campaigns versus 1 to 3 percent on compiled lists, bounce rates under 2 percent, and closed-won figures.
For a vendor whose product sits in that stack, this is a direct fit: the content can place the sponsor at a named layer and explain what breaks when the layer above or below is weak.
The tradeoff is audience and prerequisite budget.
Alex Vacca's material assumes a company already running multilevel outbound, fluent in named tools, with an existing sales team and enough budget to fund several programs at once.
A CRM vendor targeting a two-person, owner-led team seeking its first system would be selling into a world these posts don't address.
The content is also prescriptive and names vendors throughout, so a sponsor outside the listed stack may feel like an add-on rather than the point.
Dan Gershenson argues that comparison rabbit holes and feature breadth miss the small buyer; this material takes the opposite approach, building its credibility on stacked tooling and layered measurement.
Choose Josh Tay instead when the campaign focuses on retention and lifecycle marketing for direct-to-consumer ecommerce, and the sponsor needs measurement rigor rather than tool-selection advice.
Read more
The posts cover a career across agencies serving businesses at different revenue sizes, leading retention work, running incrementality tests for email and SMS, and building a retention practice around teaching junior staff.
The second post describes work with a DTC analytics company on a product designed to surface leading indicators for long-window retention, business-health scorecards, anomaly detection, incrementality of loyalty, membership, referral, email, SMS and direct mail programs, root-cause identification, and playbook execution.
It draws on benchmarks across thousands of DTC stores and combines RFM with holdouts.
A sponsor selling retention, loyalty or lifecycle measurement into ecommerce has reason to prefer this over a CRM and outbound pitch.
The tradeoff is a different industry and buyer.
Every example in the posts comes from ecommerce or DTC retention: consumer brands, revenue now versus revenue later, customer-file economics, holdouts and RFM.
None addresses B2B CRM selection, sales-team adoption or outbound pipeline—the task Dan Gershenson's material addresses.
The second post also describes an in-progress product built with a named partner, so a sponsor would be buying into an unfinished build rather than an established body of work.
For a campaign targeting B2B SaaS buyers and focused on CRM or outbound strategy, this alternative isn't a fit.
This profile draws on six posts from Dan Gershenson's LinkedIn account, read as full post text where available.
Three of those posts accompanied videos, and only the written post text and descriptions were available for them, not the video content itself.
The posts cover CRM selection, marketing-and-sales cross-training, outsourced sales development, LinkedIn connection etiquette, website SEO prioritization, and content offers.
No publication dates appear among the six posts, so the profile describes recurring arguments rather than a dated timeline and does not claim how these positions have changed over time.
The posts here include no audience-composition data, post-level engagement figures, partnership terms, or media kit, and no transcripts of the linked videos appear here.
The outsourced-sales-development post cites two figures that are not independently verified here.
The post credits the named operators to Dan Gershenson rather than quoting those individuals.
