Outbound Stopped Being a Cost Line
Growth work is where a measurement either survives contact with a budget decision or does not. Samuel Martin runs the experiment that prices a channel, then builds the attribution that keeps the price honest after the experiment ends.
This surface re-sequences the same four case studies and swaps the sentence above it. No proof point here is unique to this page, and none of the four surfaces is the real one.
Unit economics first, then the plumbing that keeps them true.
A $99 experiment that made outbound a revenue product
$99 cost per acquisition against $549 of first-year value is the number that reframed outbound as a revenue product at roughly 80% margin. The 3.45x conversion lift is what made the pricing credible, and the $1.1M roadmap is what it bought.
Financial reporting went from weeks to minutes
A channel price is only as good as the attribution behind it. Two of every five conversion events were losing their source at the CRM join, which means every channel number computed before this rebuild was wrong in an unknown direction.
One average became four peer groups
Growth targets set against a book-wide average ask half the book to close a gap that does not exist. Four peer clusters spanning 24% to 42% replaced one 33% average, and the targets moved with them.
Nine months later, the real gain was 7.0 points
The discipline that keeps growth reporting trustworthy: a 30-day number is a leading indicator and gets labelled as one. The nine-month difference in differences was 7.0 points, and it is the number worth planning against.
What Samuel Martin would own here.
The experiment design, the attribution model underneath it, and the reporting that a finance partner will accept without a translation layer.
Figures across this site are redrawn on synthetic data, no client is named, and the method and reasoning are exact.