Score any PR pitch (standalone outreach or a query response) against a 32-point system and the EMOS framework.
Subject: Data: 40 B2B marketplaces benchmarked, only 11 meet their own definition
Hi Jordan,
I've been following your coverage of marketplace infrastructure on TechCrunch. We just wrapped a benchmark of 40 platforms that call themselves a "B2B marketplace," scored against a simple 3-part definition (multi-vendor listings, split payments, independent vendor onboarding). Only 11 actually qualify.
I'm Maya Chen, co-founder and CEO of Fairground. We build the marketplace infrastructure some of these 40 platforms run on, so we had the data already, we just hadn't scored it until now.
Happy to share the full breakdown, or put you in touch with two of the 11 that qualify for a quote.
Maya Chen · Co-founder & CEO, Fairground
maya@fairground.example.com · @mayachen · linkedin.com/in/mayachen · fairground.example.com
Only scored when a journalist query or beat is supplied; if absent, this weight is redistributed proportionally across the other six.
Weights sum to exactly 1.00 (100%).
Composite, tier, radar and top-3 fixes below are all derived from the 7 per-dimension scores in Act ② using the real weights and formulas. The arithmetic is shown so nothing here is an unverified guess.
composite = Σ (weight × score)0.24 × 88 = 21.12 0.12 × 76 = 9.12 0.24 × 81 = 19.44 0.12 × 90 = 10.80 0.11 × 70 = 7.70 0.11 × 65 = 7.15 0.06 × 60 = 3.60 ───────────────── Total = 78.93 → 79 / 100
This is standalone outreach, not a query response, so Relevance was scored on fit to Jordan Ames' marketplace-infrastructure beat (88) rather than against a specific query. All seven dimensions were assessed.
impact = (100 − score) × weight(100 − 81) × 0.24 = 4.56Signature block is missing a headshot URL and a case-study link; add both to close out the checklist.
(100 − 65) × 0.11 = 3.85Subject line reads like a headline, not a hook; lead with the "11 of 40" tension instead of the topic.
(100 − 70) × 0.11 = 3.30No named character or scene; open with a specific distributor's onboarding problem before the data.
Relevance: (100 − 88) × 0.24 = 2.88 Mechanics: (100 − 76) × 0.12 = 2.88 Checklist: (100 − 81) × 0.24 = 4.56 ← #1 Neuromarketing: (100 − 65) × 0.11 = 3.85 ← #2 Storytelling: (100 − 70) × 0.11 = 3.30 ← #3 PersonalBrand: (100 − 60) × 0.06 = 2.40 Newsroom-ready: (100 − 90) × 0.12 = 1.20
Standalone pitch, no query to answer; scored on beat relevance to Jordan Ames’ marketplace-infrastructure coverage, which it hits squarely.
Clean length and reading level, non-salesy tone. Loses points for no closing question that invites a reply.
Strong across research, subject, intro and answer. Signature block is missing a headshot URL and a case-study link.
The single strongest dimension: first-party benchmark data, two named sources offered for quote, a clear newsworthy hook.
The data carries a clean arc, but there is no named character or scene to pull the reader in.
The stat is genuinely original, but the subject reads like a headline, not a hook, so it fails the 2-second test.
CEO title, company and LinkedIn are in-line, but authority is thin beyond the role itself.
Track your full pitch pipeline from drafted to amplified.