BLOG

Co-reg

Well over half of the clients who come to me with delivery problems admit at some point that one of the ways they collect subscribers is through co-registration. They typically have widespread delivery problems at the major ISPs as well as SBL listings.

John Levine posted over the weekend about his thoughts on co-reg.

So a friend asked, is it possible to do coreg that doesn’t stink?
After a variety of more complex suggestions, I offered a simple criterion: if it’s one opt-in, it’s one opt-out. That is, if I signed up in one place, and I later decide that I don’t like all the mail from Our [Trusted Marketing Partners], I want to unsub once and have it all stop.

Therein lies the rub. Most companies selling addresses through co-reg will tell you that they can’t take any responsibility for what happens to the address after the sell it. They will point out it is not financially viable for them to track what happens to their subscribers. The question I have never received a satisfactory answer to is: If you don’t know what your trusted marketing partners are doing with the addresses you are selling to them, how is a subscriber expected to give informed permission

On the flip side, companies who buy co-reg usually have a rash of excuses for why they will not take responsibility for gathering permission from the recipients. They don’t want to send welcome messages. They won’t tell the recipient who sold them the address. They won’t ask sellers how many other senders this address was sold to. They will not confirm the recipient wants mail from them. In my, admittedly biased, experience the entire co-reg industry is about obfuscation and hiding from recipients. This goes equally for the sellers and the buyers.

Over at the Exacttarget blog, Al talks about a successful way to do co-reg.

Direct co-registration is far less problematic. That’s a scenario wherein a site explicitly asks a registrant if they want mail from company X, Y or Z, and then, if the registrant only agrees to mail from company X, only company X is given the registrant’s email address. Sounds like opt-in to me.

His experience matches with mine. If there is transparency in the transaction, that is both the seller and they buyer inform the recipient what is going to happen to an email address then the recipient can make an informed decision. However, when the recipient is just told that their address will be shared, there is no informed opt-in and the recipient treats the mail as spam.

Comment:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • HE.net DNS problems

    Hurricane Electric had a significant outage of their authoritative DNS servers this morning, causing them to return valid responses with no results for all(?) queries. This will have caused delivery problems for any mail going to domains using HE.net DNS - which will include some of their colocation customers, as well as users of their free services - but also will have caused reverse DNS to fail for most servers hosted by Hurricane Electric worldwide, so if any of your mail is being sent from HE hosted machines you may have seen problems. (We're HE customers so we noticed. Still happy with them as a vendor.)No Comments


  • 65.0.0.0/8 DNS issues

    If you're sending email from any address beginning with a 65 - in 65.0.0.0/8 - it's possible you'll see some delivery problems. Something appears to be broken with dnssec signatures for the reverse DNS zone, leading queries for reverse DNS to fail for anyone using a dnssec aware DNS resolver (which is almost everyone).1 Comment


  • Our green bar certificate is going away

    Later today we'll be switching from an Extended Validation ("green bar") SSL certificate to a Domain Validation certificate. This isn't exactly a planned change but I'm waiting for responses from Comodo before I go into it too much. I'll share some more details next week.3 Comments


Archives