The Future of Deliverability

There always seems to be appetite from folks to read the tea leaves and follow up with predictions about what the future holds. I mean, how many folks in the US are obsessively refreshing polls for the last few weeks? (American’s: don’t forget to vote on Tuesday!)

red white and blue election stickers

The reality is, though, we don’t know what the future holds and we can’t always make predictions. I’ve mostly stayed out of the prediction game even as many of my fellow experts are readying “What 20XX holds for email marketing and deliverability!” articles every year for publication in December and January. There are a couple times I’ve dipped my toes in but generally my opinions are mostly “more of the same” and I am too busy to make stuff up just for clicks.

I’m not sure that’s true for deliverability this year, though. I’ve done multiple speaking engagements this year and the theme that has woven through all of the talks is there is a big shift in what I’m seeing in deliverability and we’re in a moment of transition and chaos. This was the theme of my talk at Email Camp Message Mania back in September. You can watch the full video of my talk.

For those of you who don’t want to watch the full 30+ minute video here’s the summary.

Deliverability, like most internet marketing, is relatively new. But for something that didn’t exist 25 years ago, we mostly know what we’re doing. We have playbooks and guides and “rules” and how to blogs that help folks understand both deliverability problems and how to go about resolving them.

Thing is, many of these playbooks and guides are the product of a lot of work and effort by a relatively small group of people. People who tried a lot of different things, talked to each other and wrote down what worked. We, essentially, created the whole profession.

Back when I started doing compliance and deliverability professionally back in 2000 there was no playbook. There were no standard processes, there were no websites or guides or postmaster pages. It was pretty chaotic. OK, it was very chaotic. Often there were no clear paths and we tried a bunch of things and saw what worked.

But as the 2000s went on, we started to get a handle on things and develop deliverability as real profession. We emerged from the chaos and we knew what we were doing.

In the last couple years I’ve been feeling like the things we did and the processes we developed back in those early, chaotic years have not kept up with the modern email ecosystem. We were working in an entirely different environment and the processes we created haven’t really kept up.

Take opens as an example. When I first started recommending folks use opens as engagement, most of the consumer mailbox providers were not loading images by default – even when the recipient actually opened the mail. The recipient had to go out of their way to load images. Now, consumer mailbox providers are fetching images before the user ever gets near the email. It’s a different environment.

I see a lot of parallels between now and 20 years ago. Things are chaotic, we don’t have a lot of clear guides and examples and information about what is going on. We’re working from data that isn’t great, and isn’t always accurate.

The good news is: We’ve been here before and things will get better. It might take us a while, but my colleagues in deliverability are dedicated, smart people. We will figure out the new rules together and we will work within the new framework.

The short term future is, I’m afraid, more chaos and a lot of folks going ‘uhhhh… I dunno’ to deliverability questions. The short term future is a lot of recommendations that are different from recommendations you may have gotten a few years ago. The short term future is deliverability is much harder than it used to be.

The longer term future is we’ll get through the chaos and come out the other end. We’ll rewrite the playbook and we’ll have new solutions and someone smart person will come up with ways to measure engagement that work in the modern ecosystem.

It will get better. The future will mean more solutions and better deliverability.

But it might be a bit challenging between then and now.

Related Posts

Automated link checking getting more sophisticated

As the volume and severity of malicious email increases, filters are increasingly following links in emails. This is really nothing new. Barracuda and other filters have been inspecting links automatically for years. From what I’ve seen there does seem to be some level of risk analysis based on domain reputation. That makes sense, not only is following links computationally expensive, it can also delay mail receipt.

Read More

5 steps for addressing deliverability issues

Following on from my reading between the lines post I want to talk a little bit about using the channels. From my perspective the right way to deal with 99% of issues is through the front door.
Last week I found myself talking to multiple folks in multiple fora (emailgeeks slack channel, mailop, IRC) about how to resolve blocking issues or questions. All too often, folks come into these spaces and start by asking “does anyone know someone at…” Fundamentally, that’s the wrong first question. Even if the answer is yes. It’s even the wrong question if a representative of the company is on the list where you’re asking for help.
If that’s the wrong question, what is the right question? Where can we start to get help with issues when we’re stuck trying to fix a delivery problem we don’t understand?

Read More

Are seed lists still relevant?

Those of you who have seen some of my talks have seen this model of email delivery before. The concept is that there are a host of factors that contribute to the reputation of a particular email, but that at many ISPs the email reputation is only one factor in email delivery. Recipient preferences drive whether an email ends up in the bulk folder or the inbox.

The individual recipient preferences can be explicit or implicit. Users who add a sender to their address book, or block a sender, or create a specific filter for an email are stating an explicit preference. Additionally, ISPs monitor some user behavior to determine how wanted an email is. A recipient who moves an email from the bulk folder to the inbox is stating a preference. A person who hits “this-is-spam” is stating a preference. Other actions are also measured to give a user specific reputation for a mail.
Seed accounts aren’t like normal accounts. They don’t send mail ever. They only download it. They don’t ever dig anything out of the junk folder, they never hit this is spam. They are different than a user account – and ISPs can track this.
This tells us we have to take inbox monitoring tools with a grain of salt. I believe, though, they’re still valuable tools in the deliverability arsenal. The best use of these tools is monitoring for changes. If seed lists show less than 100% inbox, but response rates are good, then it’s unlikely the seed boxes are correctly reporting delivery to actual recipients. But if seed lists show 100% inbox and then change and go down, then that’s the time to start looking harder at the overall program.
The other time seed lists are useful is when troubleshooting delivery. It’s nice to be able to see if changes are making a difference in delivery. Again, the results aren’t 100% accurate but they are the best we have right now.
 

Read More