Buying lists and other stupid marketing tricks

Back in November, I commented on Zoominfo and that they were selling senders very bad lists. At that time, Zoominfo did not have my current information. They have since rectified that problem and are now selling my information to people.
This morning, I received an email that said:

I wanted to follow up on a previous email I sent out a couple days ago.  At Company, we offer an affordable, innovative, and in-depth marketing service that will  keep you one step ahead of your competitors.  Would you or a member of your team be interested in setting aside some time to see how this works?

I’d missed the first mail, apparently it had been generic enough (only the domain name in the subject line, and an unfamiliar name in the From: address) that I marked it as spam. It looked like a bunch of the other spam I get, it came to an address different than that on the website.
I asked the sender where he got my email address, he told me that he got it from Zoom Info. I kinda feel sorry for the guy, actually. He’s clearly some new sales guy who is just trying to make sales for his company (founded in 2008 according to their website). The problem is, his company is selling themselves as marketing experts, yet their expertise is questionable. The mail I was sent did not comply with CAN SPAM. It did not have an opt-out, nor did it have a physical postal address. Any VP of Sales in the online marketing space should know better than this.
The ironic bit of this is that the founder of this particular company is someone I’ve worked with in the past. If the email had even the slightest bit of personalization, “Hi, Laura, you worked with Our CEO at CEO’s Former Company, and we’re working on a new project we’d like to show you,” then I would have at least opened a dialog with the company. Even saying, “hey, I read your blog and would like to talk to you about our new product and see how it might work for you,” would have gotten a less chilly reception from me. Buying a list and sending a generic “let me tell you about my business model” email? Not so much.
Yes, Mr. VP of Sales, you are acting just like a spammer. This is what spammers do.

Subscribers notice what marketers do
TWSD: Lying and Hiding

Related Posts

Confirmed unsubscribe

Whatever one might think about confirming opt-ins I think we can all agree that requiring someone to jump through hoops and confirm an unsubscription request will just annoy that person.
Today I attempt to opt-out from a discussion list. It’s one I *thought* I had opted out of previously, but I could find no record of the request anywhere. OK. So I imagined unsubscribing, I’ll just unsub again and keep better records.
After digging through the headers, I find the unsub link and dutifully mail off my unsubscribe request. I then receive an email that requires I click on a link to confirm my unsub request. This causes me to grumble a bit. I have heard all the arguments about forged unsub requests and the various reasons this is good practice. I believe none of them. Requiring people to confirm an unsubscription request is bad practice.
In this case, the mailing list is a discussion list so there is no CAN SPAM violation. However, I know that some commercial mailing lists have also implemented confirm your opt-out request. For commercial mailing lists, this is a CAN SPAM violation. It’s also just plain rude. If someone says, “Stop!” then you should stop, no questions asked

Read More

But that's what spammers do!

A few weeks ago I was asked my opinion about a delivery situation. It seems that a sender wanted to mail to a purchased email list. They asked what I thought about getting fresh IP addresses and domains to use to send mail to the purchased list. “We know we’re going to get complaints, probably hit spamtraps and generally have problems with the first few sends of the list. We want to do this without harming our reputation. We figure if we move over to different domains and different IP addresses than we can send this mail and not suffer a reputation hit.”
Uh. Yeah. That’s what spammers do. They split off their mail into discrete sets so that they can spam with impunity and still have one or two ranges that have a good reputation and decent delivery. Some spammers have taken the discrete companies to extremes, and have a series of companies. They purchase a new list and send it through their companies one by one. At each step, they aggressively purge off bounces and complainers. Gradually, they move the list through their steps, resulting in a list that generates few complaints that they can send through their high reputation companies with few delivery problems.
Sure, legitimate mailers can do the same type of thing. But how legitimate can a sender be if they are using spammer tactics? And these are not mailers unwittingly doing something that spammers also do, these are mailers who are using spammer tactics for exactly the same reason spammers do it. They are trying to send mail people do not want, but send it in a way that does not negatively affect their bottom line.
Spammers hide and try to avoid their bad reputation. Legitimate mailers do not.

Read More

Supreme Court declines to hear anti-spam case

Yesterday the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal for Virginia v. Jaynes. This means that the Virginia state supreme court ruling overturning the Virginia anti-spam law currently stands.
Jeremy Jaynes was a well known spammer who went under the name Gavin Stubberfield. He was pretty famous in anti-spammer circles for sending horse porn spam. In 2003 he was arrested under the Virginia state anti-spam statute. He was initially convicted but the conviction was overturned on appeal.
Ethan Ackerman has blogged about this case, including a recap today.
Venkat Balasubramani has also blogged about this case.
Mickey Chandler has the docs.
John Levine weighed in.
News Articles: CNN, Washington Post, CNET

Read More