Contact

Get in touch

What the agency reads, what I respond to personally, and what we politely ignore. Direct so we both save time.

The agency operates between Monday and Friday; this site is written in the time around that work. I respond personally to anything that warrants a response — reader questions, vendor disputes, story tips, corrections, press — usually within five business days.

How to reach me

• LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/simran-khetwani. Fastest for short questions and journalist inquiries.
• Email: simran [at] this site’s domain. Better for anything that needs detail, attachments, or a paper trail.
• For source-protected vendor tips: request Signal contact via LinkedIn DM; I’ll respond with a protocol.

Reader questions

If you’re reading the site as an operator and have a question about your specific account — what tool to consider, whether a given configuration is sensible for your spend tier, how to interpret a piece of the methodology — send it. I read every reader email and respond when I can be useful. I don’t bill for question-and-answer time on email; that’s within the scope of why I publish.

What I’m most useful for: questions about agency-tier accounts in the $30K–$400K/month range, ecom DTC and B2B SaaS verticals, and the operational layer of paid-media work. Less useful for: very-small-business advice (sub-$5K/month spend), platform-policy questions specific to a single ad account I haven’t seen, and theoretical strategy questions divorced from a specific account.

Vendor responses & disputes

If you work for a vendor reviewed on this site (or its companion sites) and disagree with the review, the process is:

1. Send the dispute in writing, with specific points contested. The methodology page describes the test protocol — arguments framed in those terms (e.g., “the 90-day window was too short for X reason,” “the control accounts weren’t comparable”) get the most engagement.
2. The response is published verbatim alongside the original review, with my editorial response separated.
3. If new technical evidence or product changes are introduced, the review may be re-evaluated. That’s decided quarter-by-quarter.

Reviews are not altered for non-substantive vendor objections (e.g., “the tone was uncharitable” or “this hurts our sales cycle”).

Story tips

I take tips about vendor behavior — pricing changes, marketing claims that don’t match the product, internal engineering departures, acquihires, founder pivots, customer churn waves — with appropriate source protection. Tips are confidential by default. If a tip warrants investigation, the investigative process and any publication are handled with the source’s preference for attribution and timing.

Press, podcasts, panels

Generally welcome. Topics I’m happy to discuss on the record: agency operations at $1M+/month managed-spend scale, the AI-marketing-tool category dynamics, the structural differences between rule-based and ML-driven bidding, and the economics of running a small performance agency in 2026.

Topics I’ll decline to discuss publicly: specific client identities, agency revenue figures beyond the rough order-of-magnitude already on this site, ongoing legal or commercial disputes with vendors.

For podcasts, the agency’s default is to do them remotely. Deadlines or specific deadlines preferences should be tagged in the subject line for routing.

Corrections

If you find a factual error — pricing, feature description, math mistake — please send the specifics. The standard turnaround is two business days for the correction to appear on the affected page, with a note in the revision history. Larger errors (a vendor classification that was wrong from publication) get a more visible correction note and an editorial follow-up.

What I don’t engage with

• Sponsored content offers. The agency’s commercial work funds the editorial. No vendor money for placement, ever. Pitches go to trash.
• “Featured tool” or paid-placement opportunities. Reviews are scheduled by the test protocol, not by vendor request.
• Affiliate-for-ranking arrangements. No.
• Cold link-exchange offers. No.
• Generic press releases. If the email doesn’t make the angle explicit, it won’t get a response.
• Cold sales for SEO, content, or AI lead-gen services. The irony of being pitched AI lead-gen tools by a vendor that uses generic prospecting is consistent and noted; the irony does not improve the success rate.

For prospective agency clients

The agency’s commercial book is generally full. New clients are accepted occasionally when capacity opens and the fit is right. The fit criteria: $30K–$400K/month spend, ecom DTC or B2B SaaS vertical, willingness to engage with the operational seriousness of the agency’s test protocols and conversion-event taxonomy work. If you’re in that range and want to discuss, mention “Agency inquiry” in the subject line.