"killer company" "game changing <blah blah blah>" "cutting edge aspects" "breakthrough cloud-enabled" "change the way we..." "ramp up quickly"

Basically every sentence has a phrase that is cliche. More facts, less hype. I seriously expected to read something about social and local in this.

The same email can be written without the hyperbole.

At the end of the day, the client is the person that can properly tell you what it's about and I haven't come across a recruiter yet that could tell me the difference between javascript and php. It's not their job to know such trivial details...

Be nice it may just be worth it.

It appears we haven't met before.

The way it's worded clearly sounds over-hyped. I would skip that job description every time I saw it.

Things that would make it better:

- More specific about industry and platform/product

- Specific role responsibilities

- Description of work environment, including equipment, other people, etc.

- Specific experience and skills required & desired

This is basically regular job description stuff.

You can have hype, but put some actual content in the email.

As many know, the real world is not a meritocracy. This tension makes it difficult for some people to relate to us and motivate us.

So my advice would be to highlight the merits of a position, team, technologies, or plan when recruiting nerds. Also peer recognition (chance of being perceived as having merit by our cohorts).

Would be helpful, for the purposes of discussion, if you added your thoughts on how you would write the same email that in your opinion would have worked.

They are working on building out a game changing communication platform utilizing cutting edge aspects of both cloud and mobile technologies.

Building it with what? Lego? Communication platform... forum, email, sms, IM, etc. etc. details please.

One key role that I am on the hunt for is a <senior sounding "lead role"> engineer to drive the development of a core piece of their product strategy.

Again, detail. What's the core piece that this killer company are currently missing and need to hire someone to build? Will I have people reporting to me?

They are developing a breakthrough cloud-enabled device that will change the way we communicate.

So they make hardware that relies on virtual storage? Whilst vague, it also sounds completely off the wall. This isn't peaking my interest, it's making me skeptical.

The company are <small number> people and are going to ramp up quickly over the next 2 quarters.

So they are predicting growth over the next 6 months. How much growth and why?

Please let me know if you may be interested in learning more and let's jump on a 15 minute call at your soonest convenience.

If you can surmise the company and the opportunity available within 15 minutes then good luck.

It's impossible to rewrite the email without info on the actual company. It's standard, vague recruiter drivel written to sound like a super hot company instead of sounding like another dime-a-dozen start-up.

I will add this though from my many years of experience in getting cliche emails in another area (not recruiting).

The skill of the person writing the email does not always equate to the opportunity.

As such, if we can assume that this email was written by the wrong person (for whatever reason) there could still be an opportunity there that is worth exploring.

And (and this is important) think as well of the lack of competition for the opportunity because of the amount of people that are turned off because of the way it is written. See the paradox?

That said of course this could be a bogus or simply bad opportunity. And likewise a well written email could also be. My point being is that you don't necessarily have to waste 10 minutes on the phone you can also simply hit reply and ask a few questions because maybe this might be the needle in a haystack which just happened to task the wrong recruiter to do the job.

The OP's point is taken. This isn't what recruiters should do to attract many candidates. Otoh it could be a good situation for someone who reads it on an individual level.