01
SaaS companies
Products whose buyers search the problem long before they search the category.
In the record
- Lumin PDF
- CloudCall
- Agistix
Service 06Product-led coverage
One product opens into the use cases people actually search, and each use case has its own set of publications already covering it.
3 products, 9 use cases, none of them a category term
Complex products explained where the audience is already asking — document workflows, telephony, supply-chain visibility.
A product with fifteen use cases and one destination, competing on a term its buyers do not type.
"Document lifecycle platform" on the site; "how to merge two PDFs" in the search box.
Six placements in the same three technology titles, and none where the actual user of the product reads.
News about your release, sent to editors who commission answers to their readers' questions.
A tool sold in four countries with a link profile built entirely in one of them.
The topics exist, the audience exists, and there is nothing on the site the placement can honestly send them to.
Drag the divider — or use the arrow keys
01
Products whose buyers search the problem long before they search the category.
In the record
02
Category pages competing against directories and every other agency in the city.
In the record
03
White-label delivery under your brand. No named account in the record; /for-agencies has the terms.
Not in the record
How white-label delivery runs04
Service-area pages that each need their own authority, not one campaign stretched thin.
In the record
05
One chain per market: the service, the city, a topic that belongs to both.
In the record
06
Community and development pages, where the market name is the search.
In the record
Not features — jobs. What somebody was trying to finish on the afternoon they went looking for a tool like this.
The words buyers use, which are almost never the words the category page uses. The gap between them is where the campaign lives.
Each use case needs a destination that answers it. Where none exists, that is said plainly before any outreach is spent.
Publications already covering that job, which for most SaaS reaches well beyond technology press — HR, finance, legal, education, operations.
Coverage split across the territories the product actually sells in rather than concentrated wherever placements were easiest.
So coverage can be read as a product map, and the use case with nothing behind it is visible.
ResultA verified live URL, logged against the campaign.
Every row is an artefact — something you are holding at the end of a week. None of them is an outcome, because an outcome is not something a supplier can hand over.
The jobs the product is hired for, written as a buyer would describe them rather than as the feature list describes them.
Where the site's vocabulary and the buyer's diverge. This routinely reframes the campaign before a single publication is contacted.
A destination per job, and an explicit list of the jobs with no page behind them yet.
Sections already answering that question, in the verticals where the buyer sits — not a technology list reused for every topic.
Coverage planned across the markets the product sells in. The record holds US, UK, Canadian and Australian placements for one account.
Every published piece opened, the anchor read, the destination followed to the use-case page it belongs to.
The record cut by use case, which is what shows the job nobody has covered while there is still budget to cover it.
203
3
3
190
The software cut of the supplied delivery record. Placements, destinations and territories — the sheet holds no trial signups, pipeline or revenue attribution, so none is claimed.
190
Tracked placements
Use cases the coverage was built around
PDF editing, e-signatures and document workflows. One product, opened into the questions its buyers were already asking somebody else.
View the full case studyThree of the fourteen placement accounts in the record are software: document technology, telephony and supply-chain visibility. The harder the product is to explain, the more the campaign depends on getting the use case right rather than the domain metric.
Wherever the buyer is, which is usually not the technology press. A document tool's audience sits in HR, legal, education and finance sections — and the record reflects that spread rather than a run of the same three tech titles.
Then that is said before outreach starts. A placement pointed at a homepage because there was nowhere else to send it is a placement spent badly, and the page is nearly always cheaper to build than the links are to waste.
Yes, and the record does — one account carries US, UK, Canadian and Australian placements. Territory is planned rather than accidental, because coverage drifts to wherever placements are easiest if nobody decides otherwise.
Only where an editor would have commissioned it. The articles answer the reader's question and reference the product where it genuinely belongs — a piece about the product is an advertisement, and publications with real editorial standards treat it as one.
It works best when it does not run separately. The use-case language, the destination pages and the anchor set are all things your team already has opinions about, and campaigns built without those opinions tend to contradict them.
Mainly in scope. A product with two use cases and one market has a much shorter list of plausible publications, and the honest answer is often a smaller campaign rather than a padded one.
Neither. No placement can guarantee a position, and the record contains no signup or pipeline data, so any conversion claim would be invented. What this is accountable for is relevance, territory coverage and verifiable live placements.
Still something here unanswered?
Send the question with the domain and the page it is about. It is read the same day, by me — there is no auto-responder.
Start here
Send the jobs your product gets hired for and the pages that answer them. The reply names the use cases with somewhere to land and the ones that need a page first.