Gmail filtering in a nutshell

Gmail’s approach to filtering; as described by one of the old timers. This person was dealing with network abuse back when I was still slinging DNA around as my job and just reading headers as a hobby.

Gmail uses a 10+ year old neural network that analyzes thousands of factors, related to email, IP, and web, integrated with all Google products, and with 99.9%+ accuracy for identifying certain types of messages, combined with an email-specific domain-based reputation system that combines IP reputation, content, read rates, reputation of other senders with similar content.

This excerpt was shared with a bunch of delivery experts and every one of them agreed. The Gmail filters are incredibly complex and they measure thousands of different things about email. Yes, sometimes you can remove a link or a URL and get mail to the inbox for a while. That doesn’t mean the block was against the URL, simply that changing the URL changed the score enough for the mail to go to the inbox.
This is part of what makes Gmail delivery issues so difficult to troubleshoot. There isn’t one thing, it’s all the things that contribute to where an email ends up. We, as senders and deliverability experts, don’t have access to the Gmail data. The poster goes on to say:

Trying to fix this using only inaccurate proxy data where there is no mediation pathway in a matter of weeks is complex.  We consume data from a multitude of sources, compile and analyze the data, determine which of the hundreds of factors we can influence should be adjusted, come up with the easiest plan to address the most influential factors, and explain that to the customer using the clearest language possible to individuals who are not educated on the definition of a complaint.

We do our best, with limited data and try and tell you how to fix things.
One of the biggest challenges with Gmail delivery is I am convinced they look at your profile of recipients. They can map someone who is collecting addresses through third parties, or buying lists based on the specific Gmail accounts targeted by a mailing. Gmail has publicly stated and has on their website that they don’t think co-reg or purchased lists are opt-in. They have the technology and ability to track that. I think it’s one reason senders trying to use email for acquisition have such a challenge getting into the inbox and Gmail. I think it’s a feature, not a bug for them.
 

Related Posts

Google's Inbox Team answers questions on Reddit

The team behind Google’s new Inbox app did an “Ask us Anything” Q&A with reddit on December 3rd. The team consisted of a Product Manager, Designer, and Software Engineer and for two hours the team answered all sorts of questions.
Most of the questions were about new features or supporting additional email providers and it showed just how new this app is, it’s not quite ready to be your primary email client as Inbox only supports personal Gmail accounts. The Inbox team mentions they are working on supporting additional mail providers but does not give a timeline of when that would be available.
For email marketers, Google Inbox shares the same HTML sanitizer and media queries that Gmail does and when asked about email filtering it was mentioned that the direct marketing community would benefit by having a place for their emails within the Promos tab. They describe the Promo tab as

Read More

Inbox challenges and dull email in the tabbed inbox

Getting to the inbox is becoming a greater and greater challenge for many marketers. According to Return Path, 22% of opt in mail doesn’t make it to the inbox.
The challenge to marketers is that a lot of opt in mail isn’t important to the recipient. Sure, they’re happy enough to get it if they notice it, but if it’s not there then they don’t care. They’ll buy from an email ad, but it might not be something they’ll seek out. Recipient behaviour tells the ISPs that the mail isn’t all that important, and a lot of it is just background noise so the ISP not delivering it to the inbox doesn’t matter.
Email marketing is like the Girl Scout of the Internet. If the Girl Scout shows up at your doorstep, you’re probably going to buy those 3 boxes of thin mints. But if she doesn’t, that’s OK. If you really want the cookies, you’ll find the co-worker who is taking orders for his daughter. Or you’ll find the table outside the local coffee shop. The Girl Scout showing up on your doorstep makes it more convenient, but she’s not critical to get your fix. Of course, the bonus of the Girl Scout on the doorstep is that a lot of people who won’t go find the cookies will buy when she’s on the doorstep.
A lot of email marketing triggers purchases that recipients would make anyway. They think they might want a particular product, and when they get that coupon or discount or even just a reminder they make the purchase. The email triggers the purchase of a product the buyer intends to purchase anyway. Some email marketing trigger purchases of things the recipient didn’t know existed, but is so enticing after one email they can’t live without. Some email marketing triggers an impulse purchase. In most of these categories, if mail doesn’t show up in the inbox, the recipient really doesn’t miss it.
Many marketers, despite loud protests that all their mail is important and wanted, know this. That’s why so many marketers are having conniptions about the new Gmail tabbed inbox. They’re losing access to the impulse.
From the data I’ve seen, tabs are effecting email marketing programs. Some programs are seeing more revenue, some are seeing less. I think it really remains to be seen what the long term effects are. For many recipients the new tabbed inbox is a new way to interact with their email. Change is hard, and there is a period of adaptation whenever an interface changes. We really don’t know what the long term effect of tabs on sales will be. Sales may go back to previous levels, sales may increase over previous levels, sales may decrease from current levels or sales may stay at their current levels. The full effect isn’t going to be obvious for a while.
It does mean, though, that email marketers need to step up their game. Email marketing in the age of a tabbed inbox might be less about the impulse purchase and more about cultivation and long term branding.
 
 
 

Read More

July 2015: The Month in Email

Once again, we reviewed some of the ways brands are trying (or might try) to improve engagement with customers. LinkedIn, who frequently top lists of unwanted-but-legitimate email, announced that they’ll be sending less mail. Josh wrote about giving subscribers options for both the type and frequency of messages, and about setting expectations for new subscribers. In each case, it’s about respecting that customers really want to engage with brands in the email channel, but don’t want the permission they’ve granted to be abused. I also wrote a brief post following up on our June discussion on purchased lists, and as you’d predict, I continue to discourage companies from mailing to these recipients.

Read More