Deliverability versus delivery

Deliverability is a term so many people use every day, but what do we really mean when we use it? Is there an accepted definition of deliverability? Is the concept different than delivery?
At a recent conference I was running a session talking about email delivery, senders and the roles senders play in the email industry and at that particular organization. The discussion went on for a while, and the subject of deliverability versus delivery came up. J.D. Falk had a comment about the difference that resonated with me. Paraphrased, he said:

Delivery is what happens to a particular email. It is what ISPs are most concerned about.
Deliverability is the delivery potential of a particular email. It is what marketers, commercial senders and ESPs are concerned about. Deliverability is more than just “can this email be delivered”, it is the sum total of factors that play into email marketing: relevance, structure, content, and reputation.

This was such an insightful comment. I can help clients improve their deliverability, but only if they’re willing to make some changes to what they’re doing. Deliverability not just telling the ISPs that the mail is good and that it should be accepted, but is more about sending mail that recipients want and that they will tell the ISPs they want.
When thinking about deliverability improvements you can make, remember that deliverabilty is not just the email, but the whole process from address acquisition through purchase.

Related Posts

When the script doesn't work

DJ asks in the comments of Friday’s post:

As Seth said, great reminder. For those that have great processes/channels in place, I’ve found incredible success. However, sometimes I’ve found my answer on Twitter (i.e., @godaddyguy). Also, there have been times where I’ve gone through the script (i.e., shaw.ca) and have never heard back. What then?

Read More

Email is store and forward

Many of us are so used to email appearing instantaneous, we forget that the underlying protocol was never designed for instant messaging. When the SMTP protocol was originally proposed it was designed to support servers that may have had intermittent connectivity. The protocol allowed for email to be spooled to disk and then sent when resources were available. In fact, almost everyone who was around more than 10 years ago knows of a case where an email took weeks, months or even years to deliver.
These days we’re spoiled. We expect the email we send to friends and relatives to show up in their mailbox within moments of sending it. We expect that sales receipt or e-ticket to show up in our mailbox within instants of a purchase. We expect that our ISPs will get us email immediately, if not sooner.
But there are a lot of things that can slow down email delivery. At several points in the process an email may be spooled to disk. It stays on the spool until the next part of the delivery process can happen. Other points of slowdown include the various anti-spam, anti-virus and anti-phishing protections that ISPs must implement. Then add in the extreme volume of email (around 10 billion messages a day) and all of a sudden email delivery is slower than many senders and recipients expect it to be. This delay is not ideal, but the system is designed so that mail is not silently discarded.
While individual emails may be delayed, most users will rarely see that delay in the email that they send. Bulk senders, who may be sending thousands or hundreds of thousands of emails a day, may see more delays in a single send than the average user sees in years of sending one-to-one email.
Email is store and forward, not instant. Sometimes that means there is a delay in getting email into the recipients inbox. And, sometimes there isn’t anything anyone can do to speed up delivery, except to adjust expectations of how email works.

Read More

Following the script

Yesterday I talked about breaking through the script in order to escalate an issue. I briefly mentioned that I always start out following the script and using the channels ISPs have provided. There are a number of reasons to do this all of which benefit you, the sender.
First off, when you use the designated communication pathway at an ISP there is a record of your contact. There are procedures in place to make sure your communication is addressed and you get a response. When you’re escalating to an individual, you’re using their communication channel. IMs get lost, email ends up buried in the pile, other things come up and a week later you’re still waiting for your answer.
Secondly, when you use the designated communication pathway at an ISP your contact is logged and tracked. This means that if the person you’re used to dealing with gets another job, moves on or otherwise isn’t able to communicate with you any longer you have a history with that ISP. The next person to move into the position and deal with issues can see that you’re a legitimate sender with a history of dealing fairly and professionally with ISPs.
Thirdly, handling direct and personal escalations are often outside the official job description the people directly contacted. This means that when they come up for review, the work they’re doing for people who won’t use channels is not as important as the other work they do. Sure, they may get some credit for helping people with problems, but they may not get the review they should get. This hurts not just the senders who believe they shouldn’t have to follow channels but also those of us who do follow channels, particularly in the current business climate. Do you really want to lose that awesome person you use because some dork thought they were too good, too important to use the provided form and that awesome person lost their job because they didn’t meet their official work goals?
Fourth, you’re not the only one escalating. I had the opportunity to visit my friend Anna from AOL a few years ago. One morning both of us had to actually get some work done, so we were parked in her living room on laptops. I was astonished at the number of IM windows she was juggling constantly. We’re talking 20 – 30 separate windows open at once, many of them troubleshooting sender issues. After seeing that I do as much as possible through the official channels that AOL has provided. She is my friend, and a very good one, and I still avoid using her as a contact point unless there is some emergency.
Remember this next time you are searching for that email address of the person from that ISP that’s currently blocking your mail. Use the official communication channels where possible, and always use them first. Using back channels for issues where the intended workflow works causes a lot of overhead and doesn’t scale at all well.

Read More