Here’s the scenario.
You’re emailing your list about something happening tomorrow.
Promoting a free masterclass. Opening a waitlist. They’re different offers, but have the same job: get readers to act in 24 hours.
Two creators recently sent these exact emails, but with very different execution. Let’s take a look and see which lands and which flops.
EMAIL A: Vinh Giang
Subject: Tomorrow’s free masterclass
Read the full email (and score it yourself)
Hey Maude,
There are two versions of you.
Version 1: The one in your head.
Clear.
Confident.
Warm.
Version 2: The one people actually hear.
Unsure when you meant to be decisive.
Cold when you were trying to be professional.
Too soft when you needed to be firm.
The gap between those two versions?
That's the vocal archetype trap. You're not lacking confidence or clarity.
You're stuck defaulting to one way of speaking, even when the situation is screaming for something different.
EMAIL B: Timehackers
Subject: Tomorrow changes everything
Read the full email (and score it yourself)
Hi Maude,
You joined the Time Hackers waitlist because you're done.
Done with being "too busy" to live the life you're building.
Done watching other people take vacations while you're drowning in email.
Done feeling like you're always behind, no matter how hard you work.
Tomorrow at 12pm EST, I'm opening something for 72 hours only.
Our take
Vinh wins this one.
Both emails have urgency. Both have scarcity. Both paint a future state for the reader.
But Vinh does something Timehackers doesn’t: he creates personal tension and curiosity in the first 15 words.
“There are two versions of you.” Now that’s a hook. The framing is clear, and it opens a curiosity loop right from the first line.
Timehackers opens with, “You joined the Time Hackers waitlist because you're done.” It’s not terrible, but it just tells me that I joined the waitlist (I already know that). Done with what? The reader has to work to find out. Most won’t.
The real issue here is architecture. Timehackers actually has pretty strong, specific outcomes already in the email:
Closing your laptop at 3pm
Waking up Saturday knowing you're ahead
Vacation without inbox anxiety
But they're buried after a weak hook, a repetitive "done" block, and a confusing offer explanation. By the time you hit the good stuff, you've lost momentum.
Vinh front-loads the tension and takes you step-by-step to the payoff.
THE FIX
If we rewrote this Timehackers email, here’s what it would look like:
Maude,
Last Tuesday you closed your laptop at 9pm. Again.
What if in 30 days you were closing it at 3pm — with every task done?
847 other entrepreneurs have made this shift, with our help.
Tomorrow at 12pm EST, I'm opening something just for you. But only for 72 hours.
It's a waitlist-exclusive. All I can say right now is this will help you reclaim 10+ hours every week without working harder.
Reply "IN" so I know to save your spot.
It’s super short. It shows real tension between 9pm vs. 3pm. And it prompts the reader to take an action today.
What do you think?
Which opener hooked you? A or B? Reply with one letter.
Next week: two welcome emails. Can they build trust and sell at the same time?