The problem
He names the two things that kill campaigns: poor personalization and inconsistent follow-up.
The blueprint
- Define the ICP: size, industry, location, tech-stack signals, titles.
- Scrape and enrich: Claude Code pulls prospects and adds recent news, hiring posts and tech adoption signals, then validates emails with a catch-all checker. He says this produces a 200 to 500 row CSV in about 90 minutes.
- Personalize: Claude Code fills a templated structure from the enrichment data, with 50+ good and bad examples in context. Anything that reads as forced gets flagged and rewritten.
- Conditional follow-ups, defined in YAML:
- No open in 3 days: a new subject line.
- Opened but no reply in 5 days: a value-add email.
- “Not interested”: removed from the sequence.
- Interested: a booking link.
- Deliverability guardrails:
- A dedicated domain.
- Warmup from 10 emails a day over 2 to 3 weeks.
- SPF, DKIM and DMARC records.
- Automatic pause if bounces exceed 3%.
- CRM handoff: replies create a lead record with the campaign source. If someone doesn’t book within 48 hours, they get a nudge.
- His own rule: get to a 10%+ reply rate manually before automating, and let a human take over once a prospect engages.
Stated results
He describes one campaign for a Vancouver agency: 450 prospects, a 5-email sequence over 14 days, 62 replies (13.8%), 18 booked calls and 4 closed deals within 60 days. He estimates about 6 hours of setup and 30 minutes a week after that. He also says his systems “consistently book 15–25 qualified meetings per month for clients.” These are self-reported client results: Unverified · independently.
Caveats
- X: @alejandroarceg (verified 2026-10-13: linked from alejandroarce.com).
- Scraping LinkedIn may conflict with LinkedIn’s terms. Present this as his method, not an endorsement.
- He runs this for clients, not for his own product.
Sources
Get one teardown a week.
Same format, a new operator every issue. Double opt-in.