Warm intro request template: 6 variants founders can actually use

Why "happy to intro" goes nowhere

When someone agrees to introduce you, they have agreed to spend a small piece of their own credibility. The investor on the other end reads the forward as a signal: this person thinks I should take this. Every connector knows this at some level, which is why an agreement to intro is cheap and the actual forward is expensive. The gap between the two is where most warm paths die.

What closes the gap is removing the connector's work and protecting the connector's reputation. Removing work means writing a forwardable blurb they can paste with zero editing: who you are, why this investor specifically, what you want, in the connector's voice or close to it. Protecting reputation means giving the connector an easy out, the double opt-in, so they never feel like they are forcing a contact into something. "Feel free to ignore if it's not a fit" is not politeness. It is what lets a careful person hit forward.

The double opt-in is the standard for a reason. The connector asks the investor "want me to intro?" before passing your details. It protects everyone, and it is the structure every variant below is built around. You write two things: a short note to the connector, and a forwardable blurb the connector can send to the investor once the investor says yes.

The principle: write for the forwarder, not the investor

Founders draft intro requests aimed at the investor. They polish the part that sells the company. But the investor is not the bottleneck at this stage. The connector is. So the request has to be optimized for the connector's specific situation:

• How well does the connector know you? (Determines how much you re-establish context.)
• How well does the connector know the investor? (Determines how confidently they can vouch.)
• What is the connector's credibility with this investor based on? (Founder peer, operator, customer, weak professional tie.)
• What does forwarding you cost the connector? (A favor between friends is cheap. A customer vouching to a fund spends real capital.)

The six variants below are the six most common connector types in a founder-led round. Each has a different answer to those four questions, so each gets a different note and a different blurb. Steal the structure, swap in your real specifics, never send them as written.

The 6 variants

Each variant has two parts. Note to connector is what you send the person forwarding you. Forwardable blurb is what they send the investor after the double opt-in. Brackets are placeholders for your real details.

Variant 1 — Founder friend (already backed by the target fund)

The strongest path. The connector is a peer the investor already wrote a check to. Their vouch carries the most weight and costs them the least. Keep it casual; over-formality reads as odd between founders.

Note to connector:

Hey [name], you raised from [investor/fund] last year. We're raising our [round] now and they'd be near the top of my list. Any chance you'd be up for a quick intro? Totally fine if not, or if you'd rather just tell me whether they're worth the time. Two lines you can forward if it's easier: [paste blurb below].

Forwardable blurb:

Want to intro you to [name], founder of [company]. They're building [one concrete line: what it does and for whom]. [One proof line: a real metric, a named design partner, or a specific traction fact.] Raising [round, amount]. I think it's relevant to you because [specific reason tied to that investor's thesis]. Want me to connect you?

Variant 2 — Advisor or chief of staff (helping you raise)

This person works with you and may make the intro on your behalf, sometimes from their own inbox. They know your story cold, so you do not re-explain the company. You give them the investor-specific angle they might not have.

Note to connector:

[Name], for the raise: [investor] at [fund] is a target. The angle is [why this investor specifically: a portfolio adjacency, a thesis match, a public post they wrote]. Can you run the intro? Blurb's below, edit to your voice.

Forwardable blurb:

Introducing [founder], founder of [company] [if the advisor's relationship adds weight: who I've been working with on X]. [One line on the company.] [One proof line.] They're raising [round] and you came to mind because [specific reason]. Happy to share the deck if useful, want the intro?

Variant 3 — Existing investor (angel or earlier-round backer)

An investor on your cap table introducing you to another investor is high-signal: they already bet on you and are now spending their network to help the round. They will want to look smart in front of a peer, so give them a sharp, current reason and a recent metric.

Note to connector:

[Name], we're opening the [round]. [Investor] at [fund] would be a strong fit because [thesis/stage reason]. Since you're in, your intro would carry real weight. Quick numbers you can use if you forward: [1-2 current metrics]. Up for it? No pressure if the timing's off for you.

Forwardable blurb:

[Name], want to put you in touch with [founder] at [company], one of our portfolio companies. Since I invested they've [recent progress: metric, milestone, named logo]. They're raising [round] and I think it's squarely in your lane because [reason]. Worth a look, shall I connect you?

Variant 4 — Customer or design partner

The most undervalued and most delicate path. A customer vouching to a fund is the strongest possible signal because they pay you. But forwarding you costs them real capital with their own contact, and they are not a fundraising native. Do almost all the work for them, keep it short, and make the ask tiny.

Note to connector:

[Name], a slightly unusual ask. We're raising and [investor] at [fund] is someone I'd love to reach. They invest in tools like ours, and a word from a customer who actually uses [product] would mean a lot. If you're comfortable, I drafted something you could forward, edit freely. If it's awkward at all, just ignore this. Either way, thank you for being a great partner.

Forwardable blurb:

[Name], I want to introduce [founder] from [company]. We use [product] for [the concrete job it does for the customer], and it's [the honest, specific result]. They're raising and your name came up as someone who backs this space. Thought the intro might be worth making. Want me to connect you two?

Variant 5 — Operator (a respected name, not a close friend)

A senior operator whose name carries weight but who does not know you well. They will protect their reputation hard, so the burden is on you to make the vouch low-risk. Re-establish context in one line, be specific about why you are asking them, and give them a blurb that vouches for the opportunity without forcing them to vouch for you personally.

Note to connector:

[Name], we met at [specific context] / [mutual connection] suggested I reach out. Short version: I'm [founder] building [company], [one line]. We're raising [round] and I know you're close to [investor]. Would you be open to a light intro? I wrote a version you can forward that doesn't put you on the hook for anything beyond a connection: [blurb]. And no problem at all if you'd rather not.

Forwardable blurb:

[Investor], passing along [founder], who's building [company] [one concrete line]. [One proof line.] They're raising [round] and asked for a connection to you given [your thesis/portfolio reason]. I'll let the work speak for itself, but thought it was worth getting in front of you. Want me to make the intro?

Variant 6 — Weak tie (a contact you barely know but who knows the investor)

A LinkedIn-degree connection, a conference acquaintance, someone two coffees deep. The vouch is weak, so do not ask for one. Ask only for the connection, make it trivially easy to decline, and lead with the specific reason their path is the right one rather than any claim on the relationship.

Note to connector:

[Name], we [exact context: connected at X / both know Y]. I'll keep this short. I'm raising for [company], [one line on what it is], and I noticed you're connected to [investor], who'd be a great fit because [specific reason]. Would you be open to a quick double opt-in intro? Here's a blurb you could forward, and genuinely no worries if you'd rather not, I know we don't know each other well.

Forwardable blurb:

[Investor], a founder in my network, [name] at [company], asked to be connected to you. They're building [one line] and raising [round]. The reason they wanted to reach you specifically: [thesis/stage/portfolio reason]. Passing it along in case it's useful, want me to intro?

Before / after: the same request, fixed

Before (what P sent the customer):

Hi [name]! Hope you're well. We're fundraising and I saw you're connected to [partner] at [fund]. Would you mind introducing us? I've attached our deck. Thanks so much!!

This makes the customer do everything: figure out what to say, decide whether vouching is safe, write the blurb, and carry a deck attachment into someone else's inbox. It also asks for a stronger endorsement than a customer is ready to give cold.

After (Variant 4):

[Name], a slightly unusual ask. We're raising and [partner] at [fund] is someone I'd love to reach. A word from a customer who actually uses [product] would mean a lot. If you're comfortable, here's something you could forward, edit freely. If it's awkward, just ignore this, no problem at all.

[Forwardable blurb pasted underneath.]

The work is done. The endorsement is sized to what a customer can honestly give. The out is explicit. This is the version that gets forwarded.

When not to ask

The intro request is a tool with a cost, and a few situations call for not using it:

• You are not ready to raise. If your deck, data room, and story are not ready, a warm intro spends a path you cannot reopen. A connector will not re-intro you in six weeks because you "weren't ready last time."
• The connector is lukewarm on you. If they hesitate, do not push for the forward. Ask instead: "Honestly, would you intro, or is it too early?" A weak intro is worse than none, because the investor reads the connector's lack of conviction.
• The investor is wrong for the stage or thesis. Burning a customer's goodwill to reach a fund that does not do your stage is a bad trade. Confirm fit before you ask.
• You can reach them cold with a strong specific hook. Sometimes a precise cold note outperforms a half-hearted warm intro. Save warm paths for investors where the vouch genuinely changes the odds.

The connector follow-up

The work does not end when the connector says "sent." Two follow-ups decide whether the path stays usable:

First, to the investor, within 24 hours of the forward landing: reply to the intro thread, move the connector to bcc (so they stop getting the back-and-forth), thank them in one line, and propose two concrete time slots. Speed here is the single biggest predictor of whether a warm intro converts to a meeting.

Second, to the connector, once you know the outcome: a short, real update. "We met, going to a partner meeting, thank you" or "Not a fit on stage, but I appreciated it." This is not just manners. A connector who hears how their intro went is a connector who will forward you again. A connector who never hears back assumes it went nowhere and stops opening doors.

The artifact: warm intro request checklist

Before you send any intro request, run it against this. If you cannot check all of the first block, the request is not ready.

WARM INTRO REQUEST — PRE-SEND CHECKLIST

THE FORWARDER (must all be true)
  [ ] I picked the variant that matches WHO is forwarding (friend / advisor /
      investor / customer / operator / weak tie)
  [ ] The note re-establishes only as much context as THIS connector needs
  [ ] I gave an explicit, easy out ("ignore if not a fit")
  [ ] I'm asking for a vouch sized to what this connector can honestly give
  [ ] Structure is double opt-in (connector checks with investor first)

THE FORWARDABLE BLURB (paste-ready, zero edits required)
  [ ] One line: what the company does and for whom
  [ ] One proof line: a REAL metric, named partner, or traction fact
      (no invented numbers; use a placeholder if you don't have one yet)
  [ ] One line: why THIS investor specifically (their thesis/stage/portfolio)
  [ ] The round and amount
  [ ] Ends with the connector's natural question ("want me to connect you?")
  [ ] No deck attached in the first message

AFTER THE FORWARD
  [ ] Reply to investor < 24h, connector to bcc, 2 time slots proposed
  [ ] Connector gets a real outcome update either way

DON'T-SEND TRIGGERS (if any is true, stop)
  [ ] I'm not actually ready to raise
  [ ] The connector is lukewarm on me
  [ ] Wrong stage / thesis for this investor

Where RoundOS fits

The hard part of this at scale is not writing one good blurb. It is knowing, across a list of 60 investors, which connector is the right forwarder for each one, which of your paths are strong versus weak, and what the correct proof line is for a given investor's thesis. That is path and context work, and it lives scattered across your email, your LinkedIn exports, your CRM, and your memory.

RoundOS reads the sources where the round already lives and maps the paths: for a target investor, it surfaces who in your world can reach them and how strong each path is, so you are picking the right variant for the right forwarder instead of guessing. Because it holds the investor's context, the thesis, stage, and recent portfolio, it drafts the forwardable blurb with the specific "why you" line already filled in, grounded in real data rather than a template you have to complete from scratch. You still decide who to ask and when. The tool removes the part where you stare at a name and try to remember who knows them and what to say.