> On 27 Nov 2023, at 20:09, Greg Brooks via mailop <mailop@mailop.org> wrote: > > Maybe it's just like this in my world but: Everyone understands money. > > Can you make a compelling case about the hard-dollar expenses and time that > bungled IP rep and/or impacted deliverability costs? Or the math behind high > deliverability to an engaged, opt-in list vs. iffy deliverability to a > firehose list? > > Mind you, the math might not be compelling -- it's possible that there really > is higher ROI in that firehose list, or that management is utterly unwilling > to consider the sunk costs of I.T. time. But if it were my issue? Money math > is how I'd try to tackle it.
I’ve been trying for 20 years to make the money work better for COI. The challenge is that all too many companies are wildly successful and make tons of money without COI. I’ve even had big clients (tens of millions of emails a day) tell me that their executive team would not even consider COI - too much friction for their users. Now, it wasn’t just marketing - these were emails related to activity on line. Now, I do try and “sneak” COI in and create tiers of subscribers and such. But, if it were actually more profitable I think you’d discover more companies would be doing it. Coming at it from a money approach… if you’re actually honest about the costs - even when you add in the ‘hidden’ IT costs and the costs of recovering from a significant deliverability problem the numbers don’t support COI. I know this is wildly unpopular - which I why I tend to stay out of these discussions. But my experience is that if you are even slightly honest about the numbers then COI doesn’t work for most companies. Hell, even if you are dishonest and make the costs of deliverability problems higher than they are it can still be challenging to make COI look more profitable. I really wish this weren’t true and I’ve been trying to make it true for years. But, sometimes reality bites. laura > > Greg > > --- > Greg Brooks > Better Cities Project > > > > On 2023-11-27 11:04, Randolf Richardson, Postmaster via mailop wrote: >>> Am 27.11.2023 um 10:42:58 Uhr schrieb Randolf Richardson, Postmaster >>> via mailop: >>> > Many marketing people seem to be terrified of the idea of >>> > users having to confirm their consent when subscribing to a mailing >>> > list (e.g., by following a unique link in an eMail message to >>> > complete the process). The marketers almost always say "it will be >>> > too complicated for the average user," and want to eliminate the >>> > confirmation step altogether (which is not an ethical approach from >>> > my perspective). >>> Tell them that not doing opt-in will make them spammers and that the >>> servers of your company will be listed in blacklists, so you cannot >>> reach anybody until that listing is expired. >> We already do this, and we refuse to host any eMail lists that are >> not confirming consent properly because of the ethics considerations, >> and for the very reason that you just covered. >>> Without a confirmation, everybody can simply subscribe any address and >>> that will be abused. >> I agree. What I'm trying to do is convince non-technical management >> to side with taking care to respect consent instead of siding with >> the marketing people who obviously don't care. In a way, this is a >> struggle between technical people who care about consent vs. >> marketing people who just want to advertise and use damage-control >> methods to clean up the mess (the marketers also seem to refuse to >> care about the ethics or the blacklists, and have the attitude that >> everyone's replaceable as long as they get what they want). >>> Even the confirmation messages can already be used for mass mailing if >>> an abuser submits the form many times for many addresses. >> Yes. There are ways to mitigate at least some of that, but these >> techniques are beyond the scope of what I'm asking for -- I'm trying >> to find ways to persuade management that the technical measures are >> necessary and must take precedence over what the marketers want. >> (Thanks for your prompt reply.) >> Postmaster - postmas...@inter-corporate.com >> Randolf Richardson - rand...@inter-corporate.com >> Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc. >> Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada >> https://www.inter-corporate.com/ >> _______________________________________________ >> mailop mailing list >> mailop@mailop.org >> https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop -- The Delivery Expert Laura Atkins Word to the Wise la...@wordtothewise.com Delivery hints and commentary: http://wordtothewise.com/blog
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
