One Email Every 60 Days

I have built a lot of email sequences. Three emails. Five emails. One with seven.

I don't think most of them were worth building.

The idea that changed my mind came from Taylor Heron. Send one email. Wait 60 days. Send one more.

That is the whole thing.

Why a sequence feels the way it does

Picture the last cold sequence you got.

Day one, the pitch. Day three, "just floating this to the top of your inbox." Day seven, "did you get a chance to look?" Day twelve, the breakup email that is really one more pitch.

By the second one you knew it was a machine.

So you did not reply. You waited for it to stop.

That is the actual behavior a fast sequence produces. Not consideration. Waiting.

And the person sending it reads your silence as "not interested," when what you were really doing was holding still until the noise ended.

Why 60 days works differently

After two months, they have forgotten you.

They do not remember your name, your company, or the first email. Nothing about your second email feels like pressure, because to them it is a first email.

You get to be new again.

That is the part I find genuinely interesting. The gap is not politeness. The gap is what makes the message land clean.

Send one email every 60 days and you get six shots a year at the same person. Not one burst and then silence forever.

Six chances to arrive in a month where something actually changed on their side.

Timing is most of outbound. You cannot know the month a buyer starts caring about your problem. Spacing your touches across a year is the cheapest way to be there when it happens, without becoming the person who won't go away.

What I heard from the other side

A revenue leader told me about replying "remove me" to a cold sequence.

He got four more emails. The last thing he sent them was that if they emailed him again he would report them as spam.

That sender did not lose one prospect. They lost a domain, slowly, across every person who did the same thing quietly.

Fast sequences do that at scale. Slow ones almost never do.

How it works in practice

Each email is a standalone message. Not a follow up. No "circling back," no "bumping this."

Write it like you have never contacted them, because as far as their memory goes, you haven't.

Change the reason each time. If the first one was about a hiring pattern you noticed, the next one is about something else you noticed. If nothing has changed on their end in 60 days, that is a signal about the account, and maybe you drop them.

Keep it short. Three or four sentences.

Ask one question they could answer in a sentence.

Use a date field, not a sequence tool. Sequence tools are built to fire fast and are bad at waiting two months. A column with the last touch date and a filter for anything older than 60 days does the job.

The honest tradeoff

This is slower. Much slower.

If you need meetings this month, this is not the play, and I would not pretend otherwise.

What it gets you is a list that stays reachable. You can email the same 500 good accounts for two years without burning them.

Most sequences burn a list in eleven days and then need a new one.

I would rather have the list.