B2B Lead & Contact Data Services

It can be, and it frequently isn't. B2B contact data can be processed under legitimate interest in many EU jurisdictions, but that requires an actual legitimate interest assessment, a documented lawful basis for the original collection, transparency obligations met, and a working mechanism for objection and erasure.

The failure mode is not the purchase itself — it is buying data whose provenance cannot be documented. As controller, you inherit that exposure. We supply per-field sourcing documentation specifically so your DPO can conduct a real assessment. We are not lawyers and this is not legal advice; your counsel should make the final call, and we support that review rather than asking you to take our word for it.

Because we exclude the sources that generate volume. Scraped social profiles, credentialed access to professional networks, and personal contact fields harvested from breach compilations account for the bulk of the difference between a 500-million-record database and ours.

What you get instead is higher deliverability, documented sourcing, and a dataset that survives a compliance review. If your evaluation is price per contact, we will lose. If it is cost per meeting booked plus legal defensibility, the comparison usually reverses — a list with 25% bounce rate is not cheaper than one with 4%.

No. We supply business contact routes that organisations publish for business contact — role-based addresses, departmental lines, publicly listed direct business numbers. We do not supply personal mobile numbers, personal email addresses or home addresses at any price.

This is a firm boundary. Personal contact data obtained at scale almost always has a sourcing problem behind it, and the liability transfers to you as the processing party. Vendors offering these fields in volume are worth a direct question about provenance before you buy.

Two mechanisms. You supply suppression lists — domains, addresses, named entities — and we enforce them before delivery so suppressed records never appear in your file. Separately, when we receive an erasure request directly, we remove the record upstream in our own dataset, so it doesn't reappear in your next refresh.

The second point is what distinguishes an operational process from a policy statement. Many vendors will suppress on request but leave the record in their master data, meaning it returns on the following delivery. Ours is removed at source.

B2B contact data decays at roughly 25 to 30% annually through job changes, restructures and company closures. Anyone claiming a static database stays accurate is describing a wish.

We handle this with scheduled refresh: firmographics monthly, signal fields weekly, and contact verification on each refresh cycle with the last-verified date attached to every record. You always know how old a record is, and you can filter on verification recency. A record we cannot re-verify is marked as such rather than silently retained as current.

Yes, and this is one of our stronger use cases. For a defined sector and geography we assemble a company universe from registries, directories, trade associations, procurement records and web footprint detection, then deduplicate and verify trading status against registry data.

This works particularly well in fragmented sectors where no single vendor has good coverage — specialist manufacturing, regional service providers, niche B2B verticals. Tell us the market definition during scoping and we will give you an honest coverage estimate before you commit, including where we expect gaps.

Yes. Direct sync into Salesforce, HubSpot and Dynamics is in production with clients, as is warehouse loading and REST API enrichment for on-demand lookups at point of use.

For CRM sync we strongly recommend matching on our registry-anchored company IDs rather than on company name. Name matching creates duplicates the moment a company rebrands or a subsidiary is entered separately, and cleaning that up later is more expensive than mapping identifiers properly at the start.

Correct, and we attach a confidence score and detection method to every technology we report rather than presenting all detections as equally certain. Client-side detections — scripts, tags, DNS records, headers — are high confidence. Inferences from job postings or case studies are lower and marked as such.

We also report adoption and removal events with dates, which is usually more actionable than a current-state list. A competitor product removed last month is a better prospect than one that has been running for three years.

We quote every lead and contact data engagement individually, because a real number depends on scope: source count, record volume, refresh frequency and delivery method. Anyone quoting you a price before understanding those four things is guessing.

Volume matters less than jurisdiction count and verification depth, since compliance documentation and validation are the labour-intensive parts.

The process is short: one scoping call, a free pilot on your own sources within 48 hours, then a fixed monthly quote. No per-request metering, no overage billing, and field or source additions are handled inside the retainer rather than re-quoted. Request a quote.