This draft belongs to the monitoring tool retirement guide for observability consultants, which explains the alert-to-closure join map. Send it once the meeting agenda has closed with the leader's opt-in.
The draft to adapt
Fill every brace from your own notes. Under 190 words is the target, because an on-call leader reads email between pages.
Subject: {company} alert history before {old_tool} is retired on {retirement_date}
Hi {first_name},
Thanks for the time with {sre_lead} this week. We looked at one question before {old_tool} goes: can an alert group still be followed to the people who acted on it and to how the incident closed? {sre_lead} described incident IDs carried into change tickets and postmortem titles since {first_year}, with chat notes as the one gap.
SourceX licenses approved business data directly from companies for AI training and evaluation, and handles the agreement, rights review, data preparation, delivery and payout. Nothing leaves {company} unless you agree terms. To be clear about my position: I am a SourceX referral partner and may receive a reward from SourceX if a qualifying license completes. SourceX pays it separately, it does not reduce what {company} would receive, and it is unrelated to the retirement project.
If useful, I can introduce you. SourceX would begin with a description only: years of joinable incidents, a rough count, which systems hold them and who can approve a discussion. No alerts, payloads or exports. A "yes" or "not now" reply is all I need.
{your_name}
Why each line is there, and what never goes in it
| Line | Its job | Keep out of it |
|---|---|---|
| Subject with tool and date | Makes the email findable and ties it to a documented retirement event | "Opportunity", "revenue", any dollar figure |
| "Thanks for the time with {sre_lead}" | Shows the facts came from the company's own engineer | Praise or flattery that reads as a pitch |
| The trail question | Repeats the exact question the leader heard, so nothing new is sprung on them | Your own verdict on data value |
| Incident IDs carried forward since {first_year} | States the join keys at metadata level | Service names, customer names from alert titles, incident counts you counted yourself |
| "Chat notes as the one gap" | Shows you reported the weak point as well as the strong one | A suggestion that they should export more to make a deal work |
| What SourceX does | One accurate sentence | Named AI labs, "buyers are waiting", any promise of demand |
| "Nothing leaves {company} unless you agree terms" | Lowers the cost of saying yes to a conversation | Hints that SourceX already has access |
| Disclosure sentences | Puts your interest in writing before any introduction | Soft wording like "there may be a small benefit to me" |
| "Unrelated to the retirement project" | Separates your paid engagement from the referral | Any link between the referral and your project fee or scope |
| Description-only ask | Draws the metadata boundary in writing | A request for a sample, dashboard screenshot or CSV |
| "Yes or not now" | Gives a one-word exit | Follow-ups, reminders or deadlines of your own |
The disclosure is plain on purpose
The FTC's Endorsement Guides call for clear and conspicuous disclosure of a connection between an endorser and a seller that the audience would not expect and that could change how much weight they give the recommendation, and they treat the chance of payment as such a connection. Whether those guides reach a private business email is for your own advisers; writing the sentence plainly removes the question.
The second paragraph names the trail, not the tool
PagerDuty documents that related alerts can be grouped into one incident and that responders merging incidents or moving alerts helps the grouping learn. Those corrections are human decisions, which is why the email asks about people who acted, not about alert volume. Google's SRE book describes a postmortem as a written record of the incident, its impact, the actions taken, root causes and follow-up actions, so "how the incident closed" points at that document. The email cites neither source; it only uses the same words the SRE lead used.
PagerDutySwaps for common situations
| What you learned | Change in the draft |
|---|---|
| The retiring tool is Opsgenie | Keep the date the client confirmed. Atlassian stopped selling Opsgenie on June 4, 2025 and lists April 5, 2027 as the end of access, but the client's own migration date is the one to cite |
| Postmortems stopped after a reorganization | Replace the postmortem phrase with "postmortems for {years} only" |
| Chat history is already gone | Drop "with chat notes as the one gap" and write "chat history is not retained" |
| The CTO wants the SRE lead to lead | Address both and name the SRE lead as the working contact |
| No retirement date is fixed | Use "before {old_tool} is retired" with no date |
| The leader asked how rewards work | Add a link to the SourceX rewards page instead of quoting a figure |
OpsgenieThe introduction email builder can assemble the braces, and the introduction email worksheet collects them during the meeting. For what an incident record usually contains, see the PagerDuty incident export page; for the Opsgenie move itself, see the Opsgenie end-of-life migration guide.
Qualification facts to have before you press send
Check four things, all at metadata level, and leave everything else to SourceX.
- Records. Which systems hold the trail (alerting tool, service desk, wiki) and from which year the incident ID was carried between them.
- Ownership. Whether alert payloads contain customer data under contracts that limit reuse. "To confirm" is a fine note.
- Authority. The name and role of the person who can approve a licensing discussion. That person is the recipient.
- Fit. 50+ full-time employees at peak (contractors excluded), a documented operating history, rights to license and an authorized contact. Companies in the U.S., Canada and the EU qualify, as do companies in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, South Africa, Latin America, the UAE and Saudi Arabia when at least 70% of the data is in English.
What stays unknown until SourceX reviews it: SourceX's current data needs for incident trails, the rights review result, de-identification of payloads, any offer and any reward. If the archive context checklist shows the joins will not survive cutover, say so in the draft rather than leaving it out.
Once the leader replies
On "yes", submit the introduction through your partner account with the leader's contact details and your meeting notes, then step back; SourceX works with the company directly. On "not now", log the date and stop. Sign the Channel Partner Agreement before submitting. Attribution goes to the first valid introduction within the 90-day window, credited when the company submits a verified application, one partner per company. Illustrative only: a company paid $400,000 for a qualifying completed handoff would mean a $70,000 reward; the rewards page lists every condition.
Next step
Refer a company. No cap on rewards. Default reward on a company's first qualifying transaction: the greater of $50,000 plus 5% and 15% of Actual Supplier Payout, with no cap; further qualifying transactions first agreed within 12 months of the first Closing pay 15%. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, including the USD 100,000 Minimum Transaction, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
Before the email goes out, register as a partner, confirm the company on who qualifies and read the program terms, so your disclosure line matches what you signed.