Five years of trying. Three attempts with Lusha. Closed.
Aman Jain is Co-Founder and CEO of Acecraft, a Bangalore-based uniform manufacturer founded in 2012. What started as a student startup evolved into one of India’s leading clothing companies, supplying quality uniforms to retail, manufacturing, delivery, and educational verticals.
With 11-50 employees, Acecraft clothes some of India’s largest and most trusted brands. The approach: personalized and deeply focused on meeting individual organizational needs.
But reaching the decision-makers who approve uniform contracts? That took years.
Not months. Not quarters. Years of LinkedIn connection requests ignored. Years of messages that never got replies. Years of gatekeepers shutting down cold calls.
The challenge: uniform purchasing authority varies wildly by organization. Sometimes it’s HR managers. Sometimes Heads of Procurement. Sometimes Commercial Directors. You can’t prospect when you don’t know who makes the buying decision.
Before Lusha, salespeople weren’t able to properly do their job and they never met their numbers. They weren’t even close.
Then a colleague at a marketing agency mentioned Lusha. Simple recommendation: “Don’t waste your time or your money, just use Lusha.”
Aman tried it. Searched for logical roles at target companies. Purchase Heads. Commercial Directors. Third attempt: struck gold.
The company he’d spent five years trying to reach? Closed. Been supplying their uniforms for over a year and a half now.
ROI: 150%.
Contact accuracy: 95%.
Salespeople performance: From never meeting goals to hitting them consistently.
Purchase orders: Coming in monthly. Fairly sizable.
Before Lusha, salespeople weren’t able to properly do their job and they never met their numbers. They weren’t even close. Now thanks to Lusha, they’re not only meeting their goals, but the purchase orders come in every month and are fairly sizable. I’m extremely happy with Lusha.
Asked to describe Lusha in one word: “Easy.”
Because when your salespeople spent years trying to reach decision-makers through LinkedIn messages that went ignored and cold calls that hit gatekeepers who shut them down, “easy” means the difference between prospecting that never worked and deals that actually close.
The hidden decision-maker problem
Uniform manufacturers face unique prospecting challenges. The decision-maker isn’t obvious.
Tech companies? Target the CTO. Marketing services? Find the CMO. Uniforms? Could be anyone.
Different organizations assign uniform purchasing to different roles:
HR managers → Employee-facing decisions
Heads of Procurement → Purchasing authority
Commercial Directors → Budget control
Operations leaders → Logistics and supply
Finance heads → Cost management
Without knowing which role controls the decision, prospecting becomes guesswork. Send LinkedIn connection requests to everyone who might be involved. Wait for responses that don’t come. Play LinkedIn tag across multiple departments hoping someone replies.
Prior to using Lusha, Acecraft employees found it challenging to find the key stakeholder responsible for purchasing company uniforms. The role can vary within the organization – ranging from HR manager, to Head of Procurement and so forth, leading to cat and mouse games of Linkedin tag, sending connection requests, messaging and trying to find the correct stakeholder.
“Cat and mouse games” describes the frustration. You identify target companies easily. India’s largest brands need uniforms. Delivery companies outfit thousands of personnel. Manufacturing organizations require safety apparel.
Finding the company isn’t hard. Finding the person who approves uniform contracts? That’s where prospecting broke down.
When outreach takes years
Before Lusha, Acecraft’s sales timeline looked like this:
Identify target company → Easy
Find decision-maker → Impossible
Send LinkedIn requests → Ignored
Try messaging → Responses take months or years
Attempt cold calling → Gatekeepers shut it down
Time to close → Years, if ever
Oftentimes, messages were ignored and responses could take months if not years.
Not “sometimes.” “Oftentimes.” The default outcome was being ignored.
The cold calling alternative didn’t work either:
It also was a challenging road with random cold calling. Gatekeepers were disinterested and kept sales callers at arms distance – without a way in.
Gatekeepers at large Indian companies protect executives aggressively. When you call asking about uniform purchasing, reception doesn’t know who handles that. They don’t transfer you to HR. They don’t connect you to Procurement. They tell you to send an email and disconnect.
Previous data providers offered databases of contacts. But the data quality didn’t support actual outreach:
Other data providers had questionable quality DBs, with contact data often incorrect or spotty at best.
“Questionable quality” and “spotty at best” mean: phone numbers that don’t work, emails that bounce, contacts who left the company years ago.
When prospecting takes years and your data providers deliver contacts that don’t exist, your salespeople can’t do their jobs.
The five-year target
One prospect symbolized the challenge: one of India’s largest delivery companies.
Massive uniform requirements. Thousands of delivery personnel need consistent, branded apparel. Exactly the kind of contract Acecraft exists to fulfill.
Aman spent five years trying to reach the right contact.
Five years of LinkedIn attempts. Connection requests. Messages. Waiting for responses. Trying different roles. Different departments. Five years of effort producing nothing.
With Lusha I was able to close one of India’s largest delivery companies that I had been trying to reach for five years.
Five years compresses into one sentence. But imagine the actual timeline:
Year 1: Identify the opportunity, start prospecting
Year 2: Try different approaches, hit dead ends
Year 3: Persist despite no progress
Year 4: Keep trying, question whether it’s worth continuing
Year 5: About to give up, then discover Lusha
That persistence matters because it shows the magnitude of change. This wasn’t a deal that was “kind of hard to close.” This was a five-year effort that produced zero progress through traditional methods.
The colleague recommendation
Aman discovered Lusha through a personal connection at a marketing agency. They were planning LinkedIn ad campaigns when the conversation shifted:
“Don’t waste your time or your money, just use Lusha,” my colleague told me.
That recommendation cuts through complexity. Not “you should try this tool.” Not “this might help.” “Don’t waste your time or your money, just use Lusha.”
Direct. Clear. Based on experience that shows LinkedIn advertising won’t solve the decision-maker access problem. Use Lusha instead.
Colleague recommendations carry weight because they come from shared experience. Someone who understands your challenges. Someone who’s tried alternatives. Someone who found what actually works.
Aman took the recommendation. Signed up. Started prospecting with a different approach.
Third try: struck gold
With Lusha, Aman changed his prospecting strategy. Instead of guessing which individual to contact, he searched for logical roles:
Purchase Heads → Direct procurement authority
Commercial Directors → Budget control
Heads of Procurement → Organizational buyers
With Lusha we looked for logical roles who would purchase uniforms, such as Purchase Heads, Commercial Directors, and the like. Finally on the third try, we struck gold.
Not the first attempt. Not after months of testing. Third try.
The company he’d spent five years trying to reach through LinkedIn? Closed after three Lusha attempts.
“A way in” describes what changed. Not just contact information. Direct access to the actual decision-maker with purchasing authority.
Been supplying their uniforms for over a year and a half since closing that deal. Five years of trying → three attempts with Lusha → 1.5 years of ongoing business.
From never meeting goals to consistent performance
The five-year target validated Lusha’s impact. But the bigger transformation happened across the entire sales team.
Before Lusha:
Before Lusha, salespeople weren’t able to properly do their job and they never met their numbers. They weren’t even close.
“Weren’t able to properly do their job” means infrastructure failure. Sales skills didn’t matter when you couldn’t reach decision-makers. Pitch quality didn’t matter when messages went ignored for years. Hard work didn’t matter when prospecting methods didn’t work.
“They never met their numbers. They weren’t even close.” Not struggling to hit quota. Not falling slightly short. Never close to their goals.
After Lusha:
Now thanks to Lusha, they’re not only meeting their goals, but the purchase orders come in every month and are fairly sizable. I’m extremely happy with Lusha.
From “never close” to “meeting goals.” From no purchase orders to “fairly sizable” contracts coming in monthly. That’s not incremental improvement. That’s sales infrastructure finally working.
150% ROI measured by the CEO
ROI claims need grounding. Aman provides it:
We were very happy with the results and we’ve renewed our annual Lusha contract at least twice. I’ve not only asked the sales team, but I see the purchase orders that come in every month, as a result of Lusha. The purchase amounts are quite high, and I credit Lusha with helping us secure those contracts.
“Renewed our annual Lusha contract at least twice” means sustained value over years. Not one-time success. Consistent results that justify ongoing investment.
“I see the purchase orders that come in every month” establishes measurement. Not anecdotal success. Not sales team claims. The CEO directly observes monthly purchase orders attributable to Lusha.
“The purchase amounts are quite high” provides scale context. Large uniform contracts. Thousands of units. Significant revenue impact.
“I credit Lusha with helping us secure those contracts.” Clear attribution from the person who sees both the tool cost and the revenue generated.
150% ROI means every dollar spent on Lusha generates $1.50 in return. Over multiple contract renewals. Measured by purchase orders the CEO personally tracks.
90% meeting show rate validates targeting
Acecraft’s sales process requires in-person meetings. Salespeople book appointments at prospect locations. Physical visits to discuss uniform requirements, fabric samples, customization options.
Meeting show rate: 90%.
Since meetings are booked with the prospect at their physical location, there’s a high prospect show rate (Aman estimates about 90%.)
90% show rate means: When Acecraft books a meeting with Lusha contacts, prospects actually attend nine times out of ten.
Compare that to typical cold outreach show rates of 40-60%. 90% suggests Acecraft reaches the right decision-makers, not gatekeepers who agree to meetings they don’t attend.
The sales team’s KPI reflects this targeting accuracy:
Salespeople are judged on their ability to book meetings with Lusha with the right stakeholder, at their location.
“With the right stakeholder” emphasizes quality over quantity. Not just booking meetings. Booking meetings with people who have purchasing authority.
When show rates hit 90%, salespeople spend time selling instead of managing no-shows and rebooking. That conversion efficiency compounds the prospecting speed improvement.
Indian market data quality
Acecraft operates in India. Targets Indian companies. Bangalore-based manufacturer serving local and national brands.
95% contact accuracy for Indian decision-makers validates regional data quality. Many global prospecting platforms optimize for US coverage. Asian market data—especially role-specific contacts like Purchase Heads and Commercial Directors—often comes secondary.
Aman’s results suggest strong Indian market coverage:
Five-year target closed with Lusha after traditional methods failed
95% contact accuracy across various industries
Monthly purchase orders from deals sourced through Lusha
Multiple contract renewals indicating sustained Indian data quality
90% meeting show rate suggesting accurate decision-maker identification
For manufacturers targeting Indian enterprises, regional data quality determines whether prospecting works.
When “easy” means infrastructure that works
Asked to describe Lusha in one word, Aman chose: “Easy.”
For a company that spent five years trying to reach one prospect through traditional methods, “easy” captures the transformation:
Five years of LinkedIn attempts → Three tries with Lusha
Messages ignored for years → Direct contact with decision-makers
Gatekeepers shutting down calls → Accurate phone numbers and emails
Salespeople never meeting goals → Consistent quota achievement
Questionable data from competitors → 95% contact accuracy
“Spotty at best” information → Verified contacts that work
“Don’t waste your time or your money, just use Lusha.”
— Marketing agency colleague
That colleague’s recommendation proved accurate. Time savings: from years to days. Money saved: targeting works, wasted outreach eliminated. Infrastructure that enables: salespeople finally able to do their jobs properly.
From “never close” to “meeting goals.” From “couldn’t do their job” to “fairly sizable monthly purchase orders.” From five years of effort producing nothing to closing the target in three attempts.
That’s what “easy” means when traditional prospecting took years and delivered nothing.
When uniform purchasing authority hides across different roles in different organizations, and LinkedIn messages disappear for months or years, and gatekeepers block every cold call, and previous data providers deliver contacts that don’t work, finding the right decision-maker becomes the entire challenge.
Colleague recommended: “Don’t waste your time or money, just use Lusha.” Aman tried it. Searched logical roles. Third attempt: struck gold. Five-year target closed. Been supplying them 1.5 years.
Sales team transformation: from never meeting goals to consistent achievement. Purchase orders: coming in monthly, fairly sizable. ROI: 150%. Contact accuracy: 95%. Meeting show rate: 90%. Contract renewed at least twice.
Because “easy” doesn’t mean simple. It means infrastructure that finally works after years of methods that didn’t.
