Best practices … what are they?

“We follow all the best practices!” is a common refrain from many senders. But what does best practices really mean?
To me the bulk of best practices are related to permission, technical setup and identity.

  1. Send opt-in mail.
  2. Follow the SMTP spec.
  3. Authenticate your mail with DKIM.
  4. Publish a SPF record.
  5. Don’t hide you domain whois behind privacy protection services.
  6. Honor unsubscribe requests.
  7. Put your postal address in your email.
  8. Use a consistent From address.

Those are really the only things I tell every client to do. Everything else that makes for a successful email marketing program.
Things like cadence, frequency, welcome programs, content and even FBL processing really depend on the sender’s specific situation. For instance, sender who are using some ESPs don’t need to process FBLs, those are handled by the ESP. Cadence and frequency really depend on the sender and the product and the audience.
George Bilbrey from Return Path has an article at MediaPost (Don’t Let Village Wisdom Make You The Village Idiot) today demonstration how some “best practice advice” given by many folks leads to different results for different senders.
The answer to almost every generic question about email delivery is “It Depends.” This often generates groans from people who get tired of hearing that. That doesn’t change the fact that the answer does depend on the specifics.
We spend a lot of time working with clients to understand their programs, their technology, and their audience. Our advice is then tailored to their program to address their challenges and meet their marketing goals. We don’t really do best practices here. It really does depend.

Related Posts

Yahoo FBL problems

Multiple ESPs are reporting that the volume of Yahoo! FBL reports have slowed to a trickle over the last 24 or so hours. While we don’t know exactly what is going on yet, or if it’s on track for being fixed, there does seem to be a problem.
There has been some ongoing maintenance issues with the Yahoo! FBL, where requests for updates and changes weren’t being handled in a timely fashion. Informed speculation was the resources needed to fix the FBL modification weren’t available. The interesting question is if Y! will commit the resources to fix the FBL. I could make arguments either way. But Yahoo! gets the benefit of the this-is-spam button whether or not they send a complaint back to the sender.
5/21 5pm: Both Yahoo and Return Path (who administer the Y! FBL) are aware of the problem and are working on it.
5/21 6:30pm: Reports are flowing again according to multiple sources.

Read More

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.

Read More

Clarification on monetizing complaints

There has been quite an interesting discussion in the comment stream of my earlier post about monetizing the complaint stream. I’ve found all the perspectives and comments quite interesting.
There is one thing multiple people have brought up that I don’t necessarily see as a problem. They assert that this idea will only work if all ESPs do it because customers can just say, “Well, Other ESP will let us do this and not charge us.”  I don’t quite understand why this is an issue. Customers already do this.  In fact, sometimes the assertion is actually true.
There are ESPs that let customers spam. There will always be ESPs that let customers spam. This is not new. Changing a pricing model isn’t going to change this.
As I was envisioning the monetization process, ESPs who wanted to do this could actually offer multiple tier pricing. The customer can choose a lower price point for their overall mail program, while assuming the cost of their recipients complaining. Or the customer can choose a higher price point and let the ESP absorb the cost of handling complaints. In either case, the customer would still have to meet the ESP’s standards for complaints and comply with their TOS.
Clearly I’m seeing the idea and industry differently than a lot of my readers. I’m interested to hear the thought process behind this so I can better understand the objection.
 
 
 

Read More