|
Inactive is no
longer neutral?
In
response to the Get Response
Article "Inactive
is no longer neutral" and
coming from what I believe is a
position of authority and
experience being CEO of more then
one successful ISP since 1996 to
present, I feel it is my duty to
address many of the comments made
by author of the article described
above.
(My
Comment is currently waiting
moderation ..... lol)
Typical of
"everything seems backwards"
relevant to today's modern man,
more so with corporations, and even
worse with Government - most seem
to not claim responsibility for
their actions and their
responsibilities - always trying to
blame someone or something
else.
The
first subject I will address from
the article is and I quote "We’re
hearing it at industry events and
on blogs, everywhere the experts
are talking about trends."
Are
these the same experts whom told us
about how to raise our children but
do not have any? or similar experts
like Al Gore on Global Warming
perhaps? Timothy Geithner on Taxes?
Bernanke on the Economy?
The
term "expert" is obviously used too
loosely, obviously in many cases
without real world qualification,
and if you want to know the truth
just follow the money.
The
next subject I will address from
the article claims the following
and I quote "Repeated mailings to
inactive mailboxes are frowned upon
by many ISPs."
Well I agree
and that is good - but then if the
mailbox is inactive why hasn't the
ISP burned that mailbox? It is in
their power to do so not
ours.
Why
would the ISP blame the mailer when
clearly it is the Client or the ISP
themselves that is directly
responsible for the mailbox by
either the client not using it or
the ISP not burning it? They have
the inactive mailbox, not the
mailer - they said so themselves
didn't they?
In
this example the ISP is clearly
trying to put the blame on the
mailer rather then where the
responsibility clearly and
undeniably belongs - on the MailBox
OWNER and the ISP.
Next - "They
consider it bad email marketing
practice at best, spamming at
worst."
I
consider it trying to shuck
responsibility for not taking out
the inactive mailboxes and trying
to blame someone else.
Spamming? How
can it be spam if it is double
opt-in?
and
I quote "Permission based email is
the key to success in Email
Marketing."
Absolutely true
- then how could it be spam if they
gave their permission via double
opt-in?
Once again the
responsibility of the bounces and
the inactive mailboxes are clearly
and undeniably on the mailbox owner
and ISP.
The
way I see it - for a real world
example is in our Free Gifts
Giveaway Events - the subscriber is
authorizing via double optin to
receive marketer emails in exchange
for a report, software, or some
other legal product or service
absolutely free - but they
themselves submitting an inactive
mailbox to receive said item is at
minimum theft and at worst fraud
with the ISP facilitating the
fraud.
Last but not
least - how does one know the "Open
Rate" of the people receiving the
Text Version of the sent email or
the people whom block imaging from
there email? THEY DO NOT
KNOW!
In
general the article has some very
good ways to recapture the
attention of subscribers, but I
totally disagree with several of
the concepts which are clearly
skewed and who's to blame as
indicated above from the qualified
positions of being both an ISP CEO
and having an email marketing
team.
It
is further my position that
bounces, complaints, and
unsubscribes self clean the list
.....
Bounces can be
for many reasons to include full
mailboxes, inactive mailboxes,
fraudulent email addresses or
mistyped email addresses
etc.
Unsubscribes
show the unsubscribed is no longer
interested in the subject, content,
or hearing from the mailer.
Complaints show
several possibilities to include
the person "forgot" they
subscribed, didn't like the content
of the particular newsletter or
email, or just do not want to hear
from mailer anymore.
One
of the greatest Sales Managers of
all time told me - Dr. Phil Proctor
- "if you are not getting any
complaints you are not getting
market penetration because there is
always a complainer out there even
if there is nothing to complain
about."
As
for the ISP's, if you got inactive
mailboxes then BURN THEM - this is
your problem and your clients
problem.
Once burned the
email address will be removed from
my list because it bounced.
My
list size decreases reducing the
size of my list and possibly the
fee my list host gets reducing
their revenue and saving us money
:-) Works for me :-)
Case closed
problem solved.
Joseph Anderson
CEO AECNU
|
0
