Interesting.  Thank you very much.

Did Mr Usborne have any observations about text messages vs flash?

I guess why I can see why someone who hates flash intros to a website might 
like flash in an email....

You mention 3 large retailers below plus Disney.

Do you have any insights on characteristics of mailings that are 
appropriate for other classes of clients?

best,  paul


PS> I'm sorry but I have no insight on your REAL question...


At 04:35 PM 2/20/02 -0600, you wrote:
>We actually have hired Mr. Usborne for various projects in the past and well
>aware of him.
>
>What I am trying to understand is if someone has any insight as to any
>'cons' to using the multipart alternative and scraping the process of
>choosing text or html as separate settings.
>
>I seriously doubt any sizeable chunk of the population are filtering emails
>because images may mean a sales message.  We have done HTML emails for
>several large retailers (GAP.com, Nordstrom.com, Levis.com and Disney.com)
>and I can tell you, based on the results, they will never again use straight
>text email.  The science behind the numbers is clear... text is good, images
>are better and multimedia kicks a$$.  However, each has their own place.  We
>use TEXT for basic daily newsletters and wireless messages, HTML for direct
>response (sale or lead generation) emails, and now getting more and more
>into rich emails (flash) and seeing response rates that go through the roof.
>
>The bottomline for us is:
>
>Is there just one thing that would make it a bad decision to go with
>multipart alternative and allow the settings of the client to determine HTML
>or Text.  We send more than 20,000,000 emails per month for our clients and
>if I can remove 50% of the code  - which would quicken the processing the
>file that creates and distrubutes the .mail and .mbx files across our POST
>cluster - I will save a ton of money and time (time is money). ***** Is
>there even one reason why you would not use multipart alternative and send
>TEXT and HTML formats letting the client application determine the view?
>*****
>
>Matt Boyce
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (paul smith) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(paul smith)]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 4:12 PM
>To: inFusion Support List
>Subject: Re: [iMS] questions on email format part duex
>
>
>Recent discussions I've seen on Marketing Lists suggest the tide has turned
>over the last year or so and the vast majority of users accept HTMLed
>messages without complaint.
>
>However, they do recommend that, at least for marketing messages, it's
>better to confine the HTML to basic stuff, and no images. Some claim images
>are an immediate tip off to subscribers that they are going to get a hard
>sell and they are more likely to delete without hesitation. (Interestingly,
>I recall my reaction was this same way when the Iconocast list went HTML
>many months ago.)  Nick Usborne has some interesting disagreements with
>this, particularly for AOL subscribers.
>
>But copywriting email is an art unto itself.  I wish I could do it well. I
>recommend "net words, Creating High-Impact Online Copy" by Nick Usborne.
>
>best,  paul
>
>
>At 03:42 PM 2/20/02 -0600, you wrote:
> >Ya'll,
> >
> >What is the overall opinion of moving toward sending multipart alternative
> >(with a text and html format) for all emails versus, making a specific text
> >and specific html format?
> >
> >Our email system is becoming too difficult to manage and I am looking for
> >ways that we can consolidate code and streamline our process.
> >
> >If we went with multipart-alternative we could eliminate about 50% of the
> >code in file that processes our email as it also needs to contain the code
> >for processing plain text and html only emails and in three different
> >formats (cfx tag with no dynamic content, cfx tag with cfloop and dynamic
> >content, and our homegrown cffile and cfloop system - used about 90% of the
> >time - for highly dynamic emails with personalized tracking images and
> >tracking links).
> >
> >The "Pros" of multipart-alternative are obvious, but what are the deal
> >stopping "Cons"?
> >
> >
> >Matt Boyce
> >
> >
> >
==^=======================================================
     This list server is Powered by iMS
   "The Swiss Army Knife of Mail Servers"
   --------------------------------------
To leave this list please complete the form at 
http://www.coolfusion.com/iMSSupport.cfm
Need an iMS Developer license?  Sign up for a free license here:
http://www.coolfusion.com/iMSDevelopers.cfm
List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/infusion-email%40eoscape.com/
Note: You are subscribed as [email protected]
==^=======================================================


Reply via email to