You get a reply at last. Three words: "Send me more info."
So you send a deck. A case study. A link to your services page. And then nothing, ever again. The send me more info objection is the most common dead end in LinkedIn conversations, and almost everyone loses it the same way — by doing exactly what was asked.
This article is about what that sentence actually means, and what to type instead.
What "send me more info" usually means
It is almost never a document request. Three different people send that message for three different reasons.
The polite exit. They don't want to say no to a stranger. "Send me more info" ends the exchange without conflict, and they expect you to disappear into their inbox. Most replies you get are this one.
The genuine interest with no time. Something in your message landed, but they're between meetings and can't think about it now. They want to park it. They are not lying — they just have no mental slot for you this week.
The real buying question in disguise. They have a specific doubt — price, scope, whether you've worked in their sector — and "more info" is the lazy container for it. They haven't articulated it because you haven't asked.
The mistake is treating all three the same way. A PDF answers none of them. A PDF is a way of making the other person do the work of figuring out whether they care, and nobody does that work on your behalf.
So your reply has one job: find out which of the three you're talking to, in as few words as possible, without making them feel interrogated.
Why sending the deck kills the thread
When you attach a document, you hand over control. The conversation moves from a two-way exchange to a review process with no deadline. There is no natural next message. You can only follow up with "did you get a chance to look?", which is the weakest sentence in sales.
There's a second cost. A generic document answers generic questions. Whatever specific thing made them reply — a word in your message, a problem they recognised — gets buried under positioning copy about your methodology. You've replaced a live hook with a brochure.
And on LinkedIn there's a mechanical cost too. Pushing people off-platform to a landing page or a Drive link adds friction at the exact moment attention is thinnest, and the same logic that applies to how outbound links affect your reach applies in the inbox: every click you ask for is a place where people stop.
None of this means you never send anything. It means the document comes after the conversation, not instead of it.
The two-line reply that reopens the conversation
The structure that works is short: give something immediately, then ask one narrow question.
You give something because refusing to send anything looks evasive. You ask a narrow question because "what are your challenges?" is unanswerable but "are you doing this in-house at the moment or with an agency?" takes four seconds.
Something like:
Happy to. So I send the useful half rather than the whole thing — is this for the onboarding side or the reporting side? Those are two fairly different notes.
Or:
Sure. Quick one first so it's relevant: are you currently handling [X] internally, or is it outsourced?
Or, when you suspect the polite exit:
Can do. Before I clutter your inbox — is this a this-quarter problem or a someday problem? Totally fine either way, it just changes what I send.
That last one is the most useful sentence in this whole article. It gives explicit permission to say "someday", which is what the polite-exit people want to say. Half of them will say it, and you've saved yourself six weeks of follow-up. The other half will correct you: "No, it's actually urgent, we need something before March." You've just converted a brush-off into a qualified conversation with eleven words.
Notice the tone. No pressure, no "I just want to make sure you get maximum value". You're being efficient, not eager.
When they insist on the document
Some people will reply "just send whatever you have". Fine. Send it — but never as a bare attachment.
Send one specific thing, not a library. A single page beats a 20-slide deck. A one-paragraph description of how you handled a near-identical situation beats a case study PDF.
And include a sentence that keeps a thread alive. Not "let me know what you think" — that's a dead end dressed as an opening. Something with a shape:
Here's the short version. The bit that usually matters is the third paragraph, on how we handle the handover — that's where most of these projects go wrong. If that part looks off for your setup, tell me and I'll explain how we'd adapt it.
You've told them what to read, admitted that something might not fit, and given them an easy objection to raise. Objections are good news. Silence is not.
Write this in your own voice, not in template voice. The reason so many of these replies fall flat is the same reason outreach templates stopped working: people can smell a sequence, and a sequence makes them feel like a row in a spreadsheet rather than someone who just asked a reasonable question.
Make the reply specific before you send it
The difference between a reply that reopens the conversation and one that closes it is usually thirty seconds of homework. Before you answer, open their profile. Look at their company size, their job title, their last post, the gap between what they do and what you sell. You're looking for one detail you can use to narrow your question.
"Are you doing this in-house?" is decent. "You've got two people on the growth team from what I can see — is that where this would sit, or with ops?" is far better, because it proves you looked. A quick pass through prospect research in ninety seconds is enough; you don't need a dossier, you need one specific noun.
If the research turns up nothing and the person is a poor fit anyway, the right move is to answer honestly and stop. "Honestly, from what I can see this is probably not for you — we tend to work with teams of 20+. Happy to point you elsewhere if useful." That message costs you a lead you were never going to win and buys you a reputation you'll keep.
What to do if they go quiet after that
They often will. One narrow question, no answer. This is normal and not a rejection.
Wait about a week. Then send one message that adds something rather than chasing something — a link to a piece you wrote on exactly the question they half-asked, or a line about a change in their market. One. Then stop, and leave the door open with a sentence like "I'll leave this here — ping me if it comes back round."
The full cadence for this is in the three-message sequence for a no reply; the short version is that two unanswered follow-ups is the limit before you're just annoying someone who may well buy from you in eighteen months.
If you're running outreach at volume with a tool, the same discipline applies and matters more. BIZLINKED's Chrome extension runs in your own browser and LinkedIn session and automatically sends invitations and messages, including AI-written first messages and follow-ups, within limits it sets itself — at most 100 invitations a week (150 once more than 40% are accepted), business hours only, random pauses. It is automation, and LinkedIn's User Agreement does not allow third-party software or extensions that automate activity on the platform, so accounts can be restricted at any volume. That's a risk you take on deliberately or not at all. And whatever sends the message, replies to "send me more info" are yours to write by hand.
Monday morning
Go into your LinkedIn inbox and find every conversation that ended with you sending a document. Pick the five most recent ones from people who still fit your profile.
Send each of them one message with no attachment and one narrow question — ideally the this-quarter-or-someday version. Then write your own two-line reply to the send me more info objection and keep it somewhere you can see it, so that next time the three words arrive you don't reach for the deck out of reflex.
You will get some "someday" answers. Count those as wins. They're the first honest thing those prospects have told you.
