account-video-script

Their own pages are the homepage, the product pages, pricing, docs, changelog, careers, engineering blog, and the about page. All on their root domain.

Not their G2 reviews. Not a news article about them. Not a LinkedIn post by somebody who works there. Not your own notes from a conference. Those may all be true and none of them can go on screen next to your face, because the prospect cannot click them and see what you saw. The rule is not about reliability, it is about what you can show.

Read everything you were given before writing anything. A script written off page one and then padded is the thing people can hear.

A candidate fact has three properties, and a sentence missing any one of them is not a candidate.

• Specific. A number, a name, a date, a named product, a named role, a named integration, a stated policy. "We help teams move faster" is not a fact about them, it is a fact about their copy.
• On the page you can cite. One URL, and the sentence is findable on it.
• Durable or dated. A changelog entry carries its own date. A careers page is a dated fact about intent. A product page is durable until they redesign. Say which.

Then label the kind, because the two kinds licence different sentences. A claim is what they say about themselves, from marketing copy: usable, and spoken as "you say", never as "you have". An artifact is something they built or published that is hard to fake: a changelog entry, a docs page, an open role, a pricing tier, an integration list. Artifacts are what make a script sound like you looked. Claims are what make it sound like you read the homepage, which everybody did.

Then count. Fewer than two candidate facts, or no artifact among them, and you stop here and go to Step 6. Zero facts is the commonest version of this and it routes the same way: the condition is an or, so an account with nothing on its pages refuses cleanly rather than falling through.

When both definitions fit one sentence, and they often do, ask whether the company would have had to do the work in order to be able to say it. "Serving 14 counties since 1998" passes that test and is an artifact. "Billing built for modern SaaS" does not and is a claim.

The decision maker's role has to own some altitude of the problem. Which problem depends on what you were handed: the supplied use case when there is one, and otherwise the problem implied by the fact you are going to open with. That second form is the one that matters, because the use case field is optional and the check has to run on every account either way. A role that owns nothing implied by your own beat one is a wrong role no matter what the enrichment table said. A support engineer does not own the renewal. A CRO does not own a schema migration. If the role owns nothing the fact implies, there is no video for this person, and sending one anyway is the expensive version of a bad cold email.

The useful move here is not to refuse the account, it is to name the role you should have been handed. Say so in the refusal: this fact belongs to the platform lead, not the CFO you gave me.

One beat, one job. Each beat under the ceiling and at most two facts, each carrying the URL it came from. Two facts in one sentence is allowed and is often how beat one should read. Three is a paragraph.

1. The fact. What you saw, in their language, with the URL. This is the beat the screen recording follows, so it has to be visible on the page: a line somebody can see highlighted while you say it. Lead with the artifact, not the claim.
2. The read. What that fact means for this role's world. One inference and it is spoken as an inference, "which usually means", not as a fact you found. This is the only beat allowed to contain something that is not on their site, and it is the beat that earns the rest.
3. The proof. The customer story your enrichment step supplied, used only if it matches the fact in beat one. If no story fits, this beat says what you actually have, the mechanism or the shape of the work, and it never borrows a logo. A story about a company in a different motion is worse than no story, because the prospect can tell, and then beat one stops being believable too.
4. The ask. One next step, sized to the evidence, on a three notch dial so there is no gap to improvise in. Two or more artifacts and a clean read earns a specific ask with a free out. One artifact plus a claim earns a smaller specific ask, a reply rather than a meeting. Claims only does not earn an ask at all, and an account with no artifact was already refused at Step 2, so that notch exists to stop you talking your way back up the dial. The ask is never the same sentence in every video, because the evidence is not the same.

Then the order check. The four beats have to read as one continuous thought said by a person, not four labelled sections. If you can hear the seams, the read in beat two is doing too little work, because beat two is the bridge.

This will be said in your voice, with your face, to a named person, and it will exist as a file on their machine forever.

Read every sentence and ask one question: would I say this to this person, in these words, on a call? Anything that fails gets cut, not softened.

Four things fail it, and naming them is what makes this checkable rather than a self report. The compliment. The fake familiarity. The claim about their strategy you cannot support. The sentence that exists only to reach the next sentence. The output names which of the four it cut and from where, or says none were found, so a reviewer can disagree with a specific line rather than with a tick.

This is the gate a human would apply and an agent will skip, so it is written down. It is also the reason the word ceiling is per beat: an overlong beat two is always the model explaining itself.

A refusal is the output, not a failure of it. Four triggers:

• Thin pages. Fewer than two candidate facts, or no artifact among them.
• No text. No usable text on any page you were given, whether empty or JavaScript only. One empty page among several is not this trigger, it is a thinner set of candidates.
• Wrong role. The role owns no altitude of this problem. Name the role that does.
• Wrong company. The pages describe a different company than the record names, which is what an acquisition or a rebrand looks like from here.

The refusal carries the domain, the trigger, and the smallest thing that would unblock it. When more than one trigger fires, lead with the one whose unblock is cheapest, because that is the one somebody will actually do. On a list of twenty, four named refusals is a better result than twenty scripts, and it is the only result that stays true when somebody checks.