BLOG

Don’t leave that money sitting there

The idea of confirming permission to send mail to an email address gets a lot of bad press among many marketers. It seems that every few weeks some new person decides that they’re going to write an article or a whitepaper or a blog and destroy the idea behind confirming an email address. And, of course, that triggers a bunch of people to publish rebuttal articles and blog posts.

I’m probably the first to admit that confirmed opt-in isn’t the solution to all your delivery problems. There are situations where it’s a good idea, there are times when it’s not. There are situations where you absolutely need that extra step involved and there are times when that extra step is just superfluous.

But whether a sender uses confirmed opt in or not they must do something to confirm that the email address actually belongs to their customer. It’s so easy to have data errors in email addresses that there needs to be some sort of error correction process involved.

Senders that don’t do this are leaving money on the table. They’re not taking that extra step to make sure the data they were given is correct. They don’t make any effort to draw a direct line between the email address entered into their web form or given to them at the register or used for a receipt, and their actual customer.

It does happen, it happens enough to make the non-tech press. Consumerist has multiple articles a month on some email address holder that can’t get a giant company to stop mailing them information about someone else’s account.

Just this week, the New Yorker published an article about a long abandoned gmail address that received over 4000 “legitimate” commercial and transactional emails.

It turns out that eighteen@gmail.com (let’s call it—him?—“eighteen” for short) had been admitted to a four-year college that features a mascot named Roary the Lion, helped fund a successful Presidential campaign, traded e-mails with a major television network, treated itself to fabulously over-the-top shopping sprees, and, just for good measure, volunteered to work at the PetSmart on 117th Street in East Harlem.

For every email that account received, an actual customer did not receive the email they wanted. Each of those 4000 messages represents a wanted mail not received and a sale not made and an education not received. Those senders, by not doing anything to link the email address to their customer, left money sitting on the table.

Making a clear and direct connection between a customer and an email address is one of the best ways to improve delivery and email ROI. These are real customers. These are people who give a sender an email address. They want that mail! It only makes sense that the marketer would do something to directly link the person and the address. That link doesn’t need to be done just with confirmed opt-in, but all too many marketers delude themselves that their address collection process is accurate. Many of them aren’t doing any data hygiene, and that costs senders real revenue.

2 comments

  1. Neil says

    So here’s the thing. When I moved to the U.S. last year I had to set up about a gazillion new accounts:

    Mobile
    Connectivity
    Bank
    Credit Cards
    Immigration
    Trash
    Water
    Electric
    Airlines
    Hotels
    Change the country on a bunch of retailers.
    Also:
    Gmail
    Facebook
    Netflix
    Roku
    iTunes
    Apple
    House Insurance
    Medical
    Car Insurance
    Fastrack
    New York Times
    Skype
    Turbotax
    Pet Insurance

    Guess what? They ALL made me jump through that terribly onerous hoop of Gasp! Shudder! Confirmed Opt-in. Every last one of them. And you know what? I did, and I’m a happy subscriber to a bunch of new stuff.

    And, I just figured it out. The reason those companies can do COI is because that is mail I *WANT*. Marketers don’t do it, because no-one really cares if they get that mail. (See MAAWG’s consumer studies from a couple of years ago. It’s not just me saying this).

    http://www.maawg.org/consumers-don’t-relate-bot-infections-risky-behavior-millions-continue-click-spam

  2. A False Dichotomy says

    [...] out on mailing lists and Twitter, but has expanded to blog posts with back-and-forth, pro and con, argument, rebuttal, and counter [...]

Comment:

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

  • AOL problems

    Lots of people are reporting ongoing (RTR:GE) messages from AOL today.  This indicates the AOL mail servers are having problems and can't accept mail. This has nothing to do with spam, filtering or malicious email. This is simply their servers aren't functioning as well as they should be and so AOL can't accept all the mail thrown at them. These types of blocks resolve themselves. No Comments


  • Fixing discussion lists to work with new Yahoo policy

    Al has some really good advice on how to fix discussion lists to work with the new Yahoo policy. One thing I would add is the suggestion to actually check dmarc records before assuming policy. This will not only mean you're not having to rewrite things that don't need to be rewritten, but it will also mean you won't be caught flat footed if (when?) other free mail providers start publishing p=reject.No Comments


  • Sendgrid's open letter to Gmail

    Paul Kincaid-Smith wrote an open letter to Gmail about their experiences with the Gmail FBL and how the data from Gmail helped Sendgrid find problem customers. I know a lot of folks are frustrated with Gmail not returning more than statistics, but there is a place for this type of feedback within a comprehensive compliance desk.No Comments


Archives