Say no to AI voice calls
If you're using an AI voice to call a seller about their most valuable asset, you're making a mistake
I'll say it plainly. If AI is the thing having the actual conversation with someone about the biggest asset they own, instead of a real person, that's a bad move. Every time.
AI hallucinates. It gets things wrong. And the moment someone picks up the phone expecting to talk to a human, that's the worst possible place for it to get something wrong.
Here's where AI actually earns its place in off-market prospecting: pulling the data, scrubbing the list, reminding you who to follow up with and when. That's it. A person still has to make the call.
I watched a friend send 10,000 AI-personalized texts a day. We went through his list together. Deal after deal, we could point to one that fell through because there was no real person behind the message.
His fix wasn't dropping AI. It was bringing back a real person to do the actual outreach, and using AI to help that person stay organized.
Where do you draw the line between AI helping you prospect and AI replacing the actual conversation?
What do you think?
- Andrew Bosco
- [email protected]
- (603) 833-0951
Most Popular Reply
I think the useful distinction is less “AI or human” and more where you’re willing to let judgment get outsourced.
I’m completely comfortable using AI to find the seller, research the property, clean the record, organize follow-up, surface prior conversations, and make sure nobody disappears from the pipeline.
That’s exactly the kind of work machines should be doing.
Where I get much more cautious is the actual conversation.
Sellers almost never explain the real issue cleanly.
They say they’re “just curious.”
They say they’re “not really motivated.”
They say their brother wants to keep it.
They say they already have another offer.
Sometimes the important part is not what they said. It’s what they almost said.
A good acquisitions person hears that and knows where to go next.
That’s the part I wouldn’t casually hand over.
And I don’t think the reason is simply that AI can make mistakes.
Humans make mistakes too.
The difference is that when a human misunderstands something, they can usually feel the conversation changing and recover.
An automated system can misunderstand the seller and keep marching forward like everything is going perfectly.
That’s where the damage happens.
So I’d use AI aggressively right up until the point where trust, motivation, price, or a materially important fact starts getting negotiated.
Then I want a person.
Not because AI is useless.
Because AI is valuable enough that I’d rather use it to make the person dramatically better prepared than use it to remove the person from the one part of the process where being human is actually an advantage.
That feels like the line to me.
Use AI to remove the administrative work around the conversation.
Keep the conversation.