Cold outreach: what it is, how to do it, with examples

Cold outreach is contacting someone who has not heard from you before, to start a conversation about something that might help them. A good first message has six parts: a specific reason, an observation about the person, one sentence of why you, one easy question, a way out and nothing else. On our own LinkedIn outbound 40% of 27,737 people messaged replied, and 80% of conversions came from a reply to the first message.

The phrase has a bad name because most of it is bad. This guide defines it, gives a structure and four examples, covers the rules and shows how to measure it. The glossary has a shorter definition of cold outreach.

What counts as cold outreach?

Any first contact where the person did not ask for it and does not know you: a LinkedIn invitation with a note, a first email, a message after an event where you exchanged no words. It is cold because there is no relationship yet, not because the person is unqualified.

It is different from inbound, where the person writes to you, and from a warm introduction, where someone they trust makes the link. The difference matters for results: on our own account, a first reply decides most outcomes. 80% of conversions came from a reply to the first message, so the first message is most of the job.

What are the six parts of a good first message?

1. A specific reason. Why this person, why now. "I saw your post on onboarding" is a reason. "I help companies like yours" is not.
2. An observation. One thing about their work, true and checkable. On our own outbound, observation openers beat question openers by 10 to 15 points.
3. Why you. One sentence, in plain words, with no adjectives.
4. One easy question. One you can answer in a line.
5. A way out. A line that lets them say no: "no problem if not".
6. Nothing else. No attachments, no three links, no company history.

Keep LinkedIn messages under about 60 words and emails under about 100. Our post on how long a cold email should be covers the studies.

What do examples look like?

These are written for the structure, not copied from anyone. Replace the details.

A LinkedIn first message after an accepted invitation. "Hi Dana, your post about handing over leads between sales and support caught my eye, especially the point that the first reply sets the tone. We help teams answer inbound within minutes. Do you handle that in house or with a tool? No worries if it is not a priority."

A first email to a named owner. Subject: A question about your supplier checks "Dear Mr Petrov, I read that your clinic group opened a second site in Plovdiv. Our service helps with compliant waste collection for clinics, and we are curious how you handle it across two sites. Who is the right person to ask? Thank you, and apologies if this is not relevant."

A peer note in a referral network. "Hi Alex, I admire the way your firm works with families moving countries. How do you find new clients today, mostly referrals or something else? Curious, not selling."

A last note that is easy to forward. "I will stop writing after this. If someone else at your company handles this, I would be grateful if you could forward it to them. Either way, thanks for reading."

There are templates for the observation opener, the breakup message and the forwardable last note.

What does the data say about follow ups?

Follow ups work, up to a point. On our own LinkedIn outbound the reply rate rose from 26.5% (7,119 of 26,904 people replied to the first message alone) to 38.4% with follow ups. But the share of first replies that were negative rose from 0.9% at the first message to 8.5% at follow up 1. Across other studies, follow ups lifted the reply rate by between 32% and 79%, and beyond the second follow up very few people replied in the Uberwood study.

The practical rule: send fewer follow ups than the maximum, and give each a new angle. See how many follow ups depends on the relationship.

What are the rules?

Two families apply.

Marketing and spam law. In the US, the CAN-SPAM Act needs accurate headers and subject lines, identification as an ad, a physical address and a working opt out, and the FTC's guide says there is no exception for business to business email. Other countries differ.

Data protection. In the EU and UK, a work address that names a person is personal data, and you need a lawful basis and a way for the person to object. The detail is in is cold email legal.

On top of the law, the platform rules. LinkedIn restricts accounts for behaviour it dislikes, and no tool can guarantee that an account will never be restricted. Sellinger's defaults are 20 invitations a day and 150 a week, and before every send on email, LinkedIn and WhatsApp the platform checks the suppression list. Our outreach rules page lists what we enforce.

How much can you send in a day?

Volume is set by the account, not by what you want to send. On LinkedIn the Sellinger defaults are 20 invitations a day, varied by a few each day, and 150 a week, with a quiet window of 01:00 to 08:00 account time when nothing sends. On email the default is 50 sends a day per mailbox, with an optional warm up that starts at 5 a day and doubles every 3 days up to the limit. WhatsApp itself limits outbound messaging, so first messages there run at a small daily volume.

For planning, one LinkedIn account at the weekly cap reaches at most 150 new people in a week. A list of 300 therefore takes about two weeks on one account, which is a reasonable size for a first test. If a plan needs ten times that, it needs more accounts or mailboxes, and a clear view of whether the audience really has that many fitting buyers.

What does a first week look like, in a made up example?

The numbers below are invented to show the arithmetic of a small test.

The only figure here taken from our data is the acceptance rate, which was about 4 in 10 invitations across 42 customer teams in the 90 days to 19 September 2026. The rest is for you to count. If acceptance is far below that, check the profile and the reason to connect before you touch the message.

What are the most common mistakes?

1. A reason that is really a pitch. "I help companies like yours" is about you. A reason is about them.
2. A long first message. The longer the message, the more work it asks of a stranger. Cut it to the observation, the offer and one question.
3. Two or three questions. Ask one, and make it answerable in a line.
4. No way out. A line that lets them say no lowers the cost of replying.
5. Counting courtesies as interest. A reply of "thanks for connecting" is not a lead. Count replies that are more than a pleasantry.
6. Ignoring the stop rule. A person who replied or opted out must not receive the next scheduled message on any channel.

Is cold outreach still worth doing?

On our own account, yes: over 1,500 calls booked in the last 12 months, using on average 7.5 LinkedIn accounts. The reproducible subset from the database is 351 showcase meetings booked through the agents. Both come from one company's outbound with a specific audience, so treat them as proof that the channel can work, not as a promise for your market. The deciding factors in our data were the audience and the opener, not the volume.

How do you measure it honestly?

Count four numbers per list: people messaged, replies, replies that are more than a pleasantry, and meetings held. Divide by people messaged. A quick reply such as "thanks for connecting" inflates the reply rate: in the ShortVibe study about half of 395 replies were courtesies.

Do not copy anyone's benchmark. On our own account replies held near 40% all year while meetings per person messaged peaked at 2.4% in November 2025 and drifted below 1% from June 2026. A good reply rate said nothing about whether the audience was still right.

A checklist

• [ ] I have a specific reason to write to each person.
• [ ] The first message has an observation, one question and a way out.
• [ ] LinkedIn under about 60 words, email under about 100.
• [ ] Fewer follow ups than the maximum, each with a new angle.
• [ ] I know the rules that apply to my recipients.
• [ ] I measure meetings held per person messaged.