When money is no longer a motivator

Published: Wed, 04/29/26

Updated: Fri, 05/01/26

April 29, 2026

TOGETHER WITH

Welcome back to the party, Quota readers, and by party, we mean the sales newsletter that unfailingly gets you through the week. In this week’s issue, we’ll take a look at the for-profit college sales boom of the 2000s. After that, we’ll share a Sales Fail about a no-show, and give some advice to a rep who no longer cares about making money. Let’s go.

NUMBER OF THE WEEK

2-3

Top performing sales reps hit their peak quota attainment between 2-3 years in their role.

Source: Xactly

SALES ROUNDUP

Here’s what’s happening in the sales world this week:

Scammers are using AI to create fake car dealership websites, and ripping off unsuspecting customers for tens of thousands of dollars. As first reported by Automotive News, a recent case out of North Carolina shows how convincing this has become. A buyer wired $77,300 for a Lexus GX 550 that did not exist. The dealership he believed he was dealing with was real, but it had no involvement in the transaction. The fraudster cloned the dealer’s online presence and maintained contact for over a week. You can read more about what’s happening here.
Is the American dream of homeownership still realistic? Perhaps not, according to many Americans. In a recent survey of more than 2,000 consumers, The Harris Poll found that many believe the dream is slipping further away. Across generations, respondents said that homeownership was too hard to break into—and that once achieved, it was too challenging, expensive, or both, to maintain. This was the third time the company polled Americans about housing, and the results are becoming increasingly sobering. You can read more about it here.

FEATURE

The College Admission Job That Didn’t Call Itself Sales

In the early 2000s, a certain kind of sales role started showing up under a different name: admissions. Schools like the University of Phoenix, Corinthian Colleges, and ITT Technical Institute were growing quickly, reaching people that traditional colleges often missed—working adults, single parents, veterans, and people trying to reset their careers without starting from scratch.

The pitch was compelling: the schools offered flexible schedules, online programs, and practical degrees tied to real jobs. And the ads—TV ads, online forms, search traffic—drove leads quite effectively. The person calling wasn’t labeled a salesperson, but the job had familiar elements: structured conversations, creating a sense of urgency, and a focus on getting the next commitment. If someone hesitated, the caller kept the conversation moving—booked the next step, handled objections, and stayed in the pocket.

Why Enrollment Drove Everything

The economics is what made the urgency make sense. Most for-profit schools relied heavily on federal student aid, made possible through Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. When a student enrolled, funding followed. That meant revenue showed up at the front end of the process.

Inside admissions teams, expectations formed around that reality. Schools didn’t always frame it as a quota, but performance was tied to starts. More enrollments meant more revenue, and admissions became the pressure point where that happened. For the people on the phones, the job lived somewhere between advising and selling, with success measured by how many people actually began a program.

For-Profit vs. Nonprofit

The difference between for-profit and nonprofit schools comes down to structure and incentives.

Nonprofit universities—state schools and private colleges—don’t have owners. Any surplus revenue is reinvested into the institution. Admissions tends to be selective because they don’t need every applicant, and long-term reputation matters. That process functions as a gate.

For-profit schools, on the other hand, are built to scale. They can be owned, generate profit, and grow based on enrollment. Admissions functions more like a funnel, with a steady flow of prospective students moving through it. That model made these schools more accessible for many people, especially those who didn’t fit the traditional college mold. At the same time, it put more weight on the front-end decision to enroll.

Why the Model Broke Down

By the late 2000s, problems started to surface in a visible way. Some students were enrolling, taking on debt, and not finishing their degrees. Others completed programs but didn’t see the job outcomes they expected. Default rates climbed, and regulators began looking more closely at how programs were being marketed.

Corinthian Colleges became one of the most prominent examples. At its peak, it operated more than 100 campuses. In 2015, after investigations into misleading job placement data and recruiting practices, the company shut down, leaving thousands of students stranded. ITT Technical Institute followed in 2016 after losing access to federal aid.

Even larger institutions like University of Phoenix faced investigations and settlements tied to marketing and enrollment practices, and eventually scaled back from their peak size. The pattern was consistent enough that it drew sustained federal attention.

The Policy Response

The federal government’s response focused on tying funding to outcomes.

During the Obama administration, regulators introduced the Gainful Employment rule, which evaluated whether graduates from certain programs had manageable debt relative to their income. Programs that consistently produced poor results risked losing access to federal aid.

Another key policy, the 90/10 rule, limited how much revenue for-profit schools could derive from federal funding. Schools needed to show that at least some portion of their revenue came from sources outside government-backed aid. Both policies have been adjusted over time, but they reflect a broader shift toward accountability tied to student outcomes.

The Role Itself

For the people in those admissions roles, the job sat in a gray area. They were often talking to people at a moment of uncertainty—looking for a better job, more stability, or a way forward. The product carried real potential, and for some students, it delivered.

At the same time, the system rewarded forward motion at the point of enrollment. That shaped how conversations were handled and how much pressure was applied. Some reps approached the role carefully, others pushed harder, and most operated somewhere in between. At the peak of the for-profit boom, the environment favored the ones who kept people moving. Over time, the results forced a change in how the system worked.

You shouldn't need 12 tools to run a sales team. The best revenue teams use one.

Most reps aren't losing deals because they lack information. They're losing because that information is scattered across a sequencer, a CRM, a call recorder, a forecasting tool, and a dozen browser tabs.

That's the problem Reevo was built to fix.

Reevo is the Revenue Operating System. A AI-native platform where prospecting, outreach, deal management, and meeting intelligence all live in one place. No more copying call notes into your CRM. No more losing deal context between tools. No more asking your manager which pipeline view is actually accurate.

From the moment you find a lead to the moment you close the deal, everything happens in a single tab. AI reasons across your entire pipeline, flags at-risk deals in real time, and generates next steps the second a call ends.

The best sales teams have already figured this out.

See how they're using Reevo to close faster, forecast with confidence, and retire their sales stack for good.

see how it works

MEME OF THE WEEK

Source: Instagram -- Sales Humor

QUIZ

What was sales tech company ZoomInfo’s original name?

A. SearchList
B. Expodata
C. Salesforce
D. DiscoverOrg

SALES FAILS

Each week, we bring you the most cringe-worthy sales moments from across the web. To submit your sales fail story for consideration, click here. (Don't worry, you'll remain completely anonymous).

Many years ago, I was managing a small team selling office equipment—copiers, printers, service contracts. It was a pretty standard outside sales job. One of my reps had been with us for about a year. He wasn’t a star, but was reliable enough. He knew his accounts, showed up, and closed the occasional deal.

Then one Monday, he just didn’t show up.

No call, no email. He had two appointments on the books that day and he no-showed to both. One of the customers called the office asking if he was still coming. I tried his cell a few times and sent a text. Nothing. Tuesday came, same story. By Wednesday, I was less annoyed and more concerned. It’s not a job where people just disappear. You’re either working or you quit. This was neither.

We started moving his accounts around so that nothing fell apart. A couple of deals he’d been working got reassigned. I looped in HR because at that point we didn’t know if he’d quit, gotten sick, or just walked away. There was no signal at all.

The following Monday, right around 9, he walked in like he’d been out sick for a day or two. He grabbed a coffee, said hi to a few people, and sat down at his desk.

I pulled him into a room and asked where he’d been. He said his phone had been acting up. That’s literally all he said. I asked why he didn’t call from another phone, or email, or let anyone know. He kind of shrugged and said, “Yeah, I probably should’ve done that.”

We let him go that afternoon. He seemed surprised, like he thought it was going to be a quick conversation and then he’d get back to work.

Anonymous Location Withheld

GRAPH OF THE WEEK

Source: LinkedIn Poll -- April 2026

WORTH A PEEK

What is the worst sales job you've ever had and what exactly made it so terrible? This question was recently posted to Reddit, and the responses were all over the map in a can’t-stop-reading sort of way. You can check out the conversation here.

ASK THE QUOTA

Want to submit a question and be featured in our advice column? Click here. (Don't worry, you'll remain completely anonymous).

I’m 27 and have been in sales for about four years. I got into it for the money, and for a while that was enough. My first big commission check felt like I’d figured life out. Last year I made more than anyone in my family ever has, which I’m proud of.

The weird part is I don’t feel the same motivation anymore. I still want to do well, but the money doesn’t hit like it used to. I don’t really care about upgrading my life more than I already have. I’m not miserable at work, but I’m also not that interested in it.

Now I feel stuck. This is what I’ve built my career around, and I’m good at it, but I don’t know if I actually want to keep doing it long-term. At the same time, walking away from the income feels “irresponsible.”

I guess I’m wondering if it’s normal to daydream about a more meaningful career while you’re prospecting for new business, or if it’s a sign that this career isn’t for me. Any advice?

Unenthusiastic in Location Withheld

Dear Unenthusiastic,

It can be, but only you can figure out the answer. Initially, money offers survival and validation. But once you have both, it often stops carrying the same weight.

You don’t need to blow anything up right now. Keep earning, but start paying attention to what actually holds your interest when money isn’t the main factor. That’s the signal.

Be honest with yourself and you’ll eventually figure out what you want to do. It might be sales, but it might not. Good luck!

Quiz Answer: D. ZoomInfo’s original name was DiscoverOrg (you can read the source article here)

How did you like today's story?

Today's email was written by Ken Kupchik and Steve Rado.

Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up here.

Advertise with us

Books

QUOTA MEDIA LLC

651 N. Broad Street., Suite 206
Middletown DELAWARE (DE) 19709
USA

Unsubscribe | Change Subscriber Options