Hard Bounce, Unsubscribe, Wrong Contact, or Company Stop? A Decision Guide

Who this decision guide is for

This guide is for teams that need consistent operational handling when outreach does not proceed normally. It is useful for campaign operators, account owners, revenue operations, and reviewers who must decide whether to stop one endpoint, one person, one purpose, one channel, or the company. It provides product and editorial controls, not legal advice. Applicable law, contract, policy, and the person's actual wording always take priority.

Contents

1 Start with evidence, not a convenient label 2 Separate six control scopes 3 Apply the stop-state decision matrix 4 Handle hard bounces without overreaching 5 Honor unsubscribe and company-stop meaning 6 Use wrong-contact evidence constructively 7 Propagate, retain, and review every control 8 Illustrative example 9 Common mistakes 10 What this does not mean 11 Common questions 12 Sources and methodology

1. Start with evidence, not a convenient label

Store the original event before interpreting it. For a delivery failure, retain the machine response, enhanced status code where available, timestamp, sending channel, and affected endpoint. For a human response, retain the original wording, sender identity evidence, timestamp, channel, campaign/purpose, and any named scope. Then add a controlled classification and reviewer. Do not collapse these statements:

• "This mailbox does not exist."

• "I do not handle maintenance."

• "I left the company."

• "Please unsubscribe me from this newsletter."

• "Do not email me again."

• "Remove our company from all of your outreach." Each creates a different evidence object. The operational system should preserve both the source evidence and the derived decision so a later reviewer can see whether the scope was reasonable.

2. Separate six control scopes

Use the narrowest record that fully honors the evidence - never a narrower record chosen to preserve activity. Scope What it controls Example Endpoint One email address or phone route Permanent failure for name@company.com Channel Email, phone, or another medium "Do not email me" Person The identified individual across governed records Broad personal opt-out Purpose/campaign A defined commercial purpose Newsletter opt-out where wording is specific Scope What it controls Example Company Outreach to the organization "Stop contacting anyone here" Customer/commercial relationship Special treatment from known relationship Existing Customer block One event can affect several scopes. A left-company status closes the person's company association and prevents SellersGPT re-entry in new rounds; it can also invalidate a work endpoint. It does not automatically create a company stop. A company stop blocks company outreach even if other addresses technically deliver.

3. Apply the stop-state decision matrix

The following is a SellersGPT editorial decision tool: Event Minimum evidence Immediate action Replacement? Re-entry rule Hard bounce Permanent delivery failure for endpoint Stop endpoint Review if company/purpose remain eligible Only endpoint may be corrected with new evidence; never retry known failed address Unsubscribe Mechanism event or clear human request Stop at least requested scope Never use replacement to evade request Only under a valid, documented future basis and policy; ambiguity escalates Wrong contact Human correction or strong verified role mismatch Stop current person-purpose path Yes, if allowed and useful Person may remain eligible for a different purpose only after review Left company Verified departure evidence Stop person-company path Yes Person never re-enters a SellersGPT round for old company Retired Verified retirement evidence Stop person-company path Yes Person never re-enters new SellersGPT rounds Company stop Clear organization-wide request or authorized control Stop all company outreach No Only authorized resolution can change state Unreachable Defined attempts/channels fail without permanent code Stop or hold governed path Review Requires new evidence, not repeated identical attempts Unknown does not mean "retry." If evidence is contradictory or scope is ambiguous, pause the affected action and route it for review.

4. Handle hard bounces without overreaching

RFC 3463 describes enhanced status codes for mail systems, distinguishing classes such as persistent transient and permanent failure. RFC 5321 defines SMTP. Use the actual delivery response rather than inventing a reason. A 5.x.x permanent failure generally supports stopping that endpoint, but the detailed code and provider context matter. A hard bounce does not prove:

• the person left;

• the company is closed;

• another guessed address is valid;

• the contact is uninterested;

• the ICP is wrong;

• another channel is permitted. It proves that the affected delivery attempt received a particular machine result. Replacement can be reviewed under PP-23 if the company remains eligible and a relevant role gap exists. Do not automatically generate address variants. That practice creates identity and deliverability risks and can route messages to unintended people.

5. Honor unsubscribe and company-stop meaning

An unsubscribe is not merely a low engagement signal. It is a control event. The FTC CAN-SPAM guide describes U.S. commercial-email opt-out requirements. The CRTC CASL FAQ describes Canadian requirements related to commercial electronic messages, consent, identification, and unsubscribe mechanisms. The UK ICO direct marketing guidance covers direct-marketing and privacy/electronic-communications considerations in its jurisdiction. These regimes differ. Do not convert this guide into a universal legal rule. Operationally: 1 retain exact wording or mechanism evidence; 2 identify the clearest applicable scope; 3 apply at least that scope promptly; 4 propagate it to every relevant workflow and sender; 5 record who interpreted ambiguity; 6 never use a replacement contact to defeat a company-level request. RFC 8058 defines signaling for one-click unsubscribe in list-email headers. It is a technical standard, not a definition of every human request. If someone writes a broader instruction, the plain-language meaning remains relevant. A company stop is stronger operationally than a person-level wrong-contact event. It means the company is not eligible for outreach in SellersGPT. The team can retain the minimum evidence needed to enforce the stop; it should not keep prospecting under a different campaign or ICP.

6. Use wrong-contact evidence constructively

"Wrong contact" should answer: wrong for what? Record the company/site, application, purpose, relevant round, and evidence date. A corporate procurement contact may be wrong for a plant maintenance discovery but relevant later for approved supplier onboarding. Do not permanently label the person as useless. Classify the correction:

• wrong company;

• wrong site;

• wrong function;

• wrong application;

• wrong seniority assumption;

• no longer employed;

• unknown because wording is ambiguous. If the person provides a referral, treat it as a role or identity lead, not guaranteed permission, authority, or interest. A verified wrong-contact response is human interaction, so ordinary next-round automation should pause while the team routes and reviews the new context.

7. Propagate, retain, and review every control

A stop state is effective only if every relevant execution path checks it. Use a shared control record with:

• stable control ID;

• source event and immutable evidence;

• interpreted state;

• scope dimensions;

• effective time;

• owner/reviewer;

• workflows notified;

• retention/review rule;

• authorized resolution path, if any;

• change history. Google's email sender guidelines include sender requirements and guidance that can affect authentication, spam rate, and unsubscribe handling for relevant traffic. Provider compliance does not replace person- or company-level controls, and a technically deliverable message can still be operationally prohibited. Audit propagation with a denominator: propagation coverage = workflows that acknowledged control / workflows in declared scope If six workflows are in scope and five acknowledge the company stop, coverage is 5 / 6 = 83.3%. The system must hold all company outreach until the sixth path is controlled. The percentage measures distribution completeness, not permission to send.

8. Illustrative example

Illustrative example - fictional. Meridian Filters contacts three people at fictional Lakeview Ceramics. Address A returns a permanent mailbox failure. Person B replies, "I support finance; kiln maintenance sits at the West site." Person C selects the email unsubscribe mechanism. Two days later, the general manager writes, "Please remove Lakeview Ceramics from all prospecting." The team records four distinct events:

• A: endpoint hard bounce;

• B: wrong function for current application plus a role/site clue;

• C: person/channel unsubscribe at the scope supported by the mechanism and policy;

• company: explicit company stop. Before the general manager's request, A could have triggered replacement review and B's referral could have triggered human review. After the company stop, neither route remains eligible. The stop is sent to seven in-scope workflows. All seven acknowledge it: propagation coverage = 7 / 7 = 100% That does not erase historical records. It confirms that the control reached the declared execution paths. No new contact is sourced, and the company cannot enter another round.

9. Common mistakes

• Treating all negative events as "not interested."

• Retrying a known hard-bounce endpoint.

• Generating guessed address variants after delivery failure.

• Recording unsubscribe only in one campaign list.

• Interpreting "wrong contact" as permission to message many colleagues.

• Ignoring a company stop because another person previously clicked.

• Deleting departed/retired records so they can return during enrichment.

• Using a high propagation percentage to excuse one uncontrolled workflow.

10. What this does not mean

This decision guide does not determine legal obligations for every channel, country, or relationship. It does not say that every hard bounce is caused by a nonexistent mailbox. It does not convert a referral into consent or buying intent. It does not require permanent storage of unnecessary personal data. It requires enough reliable evidence to enforce the decision, preserve history, and prevent accidental re-entry under applicable retention rules.

11. Common questions

Is an out-of-office reply a wrong-contact event? Usually not. It is an automated response containing timing or alternate-contact information. Classify it separately and do not treat it as verified interest or a reason to restart the window. Can another employee be contacted after one person unsubscribes? It depends on the exact request, applicable requirements, company policy, purpose, and shared controls. Never assume the narrowest possible scope. A company-level request prohibits replacement outreach. What if a bounce code is ambiguous? Store the exact technical response, stop immediate repetition, and route the endpoint for deliverability review. Do not invent a permanent or transient meaning unsupported by the code and provider context. Can a company stop ever be removed? Only through an authorized, evidence-backed resolution path defined by policy. A new campaign, employee, list import, or passage of time must not silently remove it.

12. Sources and methodology

The sources define technical delivery standards and jurisdiction-specific communication or sender requirements. The control scopes, matrix, permanent left/retired rule, propagation measure, and SellersGPT routing consequences are product rules or editorial tools, not official taxonomies or legal advice. 1 Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3463: Enhanced Mail System Status Codes. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3463. Accessed August 25, 2026. 2 Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 5321: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5321. Accessed August 25, 2026. 3 Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 8058: Signaling One-Click Functionality for List Email Headers. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8058. Accessed August 25, 2026. 4 U.S. Federal Trade Commission, CAN-SPAM Act: A Compliance Guide for Business. https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/can-spam-act-compliance-guide-business. Accessed August 25, 2026. 5 Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Frequently Asked Questions about Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation. https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/com500/faq500.htm. Accessed August 25, 2026. 6 UK Information Commissioner's Office, Direct marketing guidance. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisation s/direct-marketing-and-privacy-and-electronic-communications/direct-marketing-guidance/. Accessed August 25, 2026. 7 Google, Email sender guidelines. https://support.google.com/a/answer/81126. Accessed August 25, 2026.