Poor delivery at Gmail but no where else

I’ve mentioned before that I can often tell what ISP is making filter changes by what my calls are about. The last few weeks it’s been Gmail where folks are struggling to get to the inbox. One of the things most clients and potential clients have mentioned is that they’re not having any problems at the other major ISPs.

meter19
Gmail’s filters are probably the most extensive and complex of all the major webmail providers. Their ability to process data and pull signal out of noise, even when it is all noise, is unmatched in the space. But, still, I wasn’t sure why so many companies were struggling just with Gmail.

I’ve been noodling around with this. Could it be that Gmail is doing something very different than other companies? Are they assigning reputation in ways that are different? Do we need to change our strategies to deal with Gmail? Are there different things we should be telling folks?

Then, I realized the big difference between Gmail and the other webmail providers is their FBL. With the other major webmail providers senders can clean their lists just by removing anyone who hits the “this is spam” button. This lets senders be sloppy with acquiring email addresses without too many consequences. Gmail, however, only tells about complaints, they don’t tell you who is making them. Gmail puts the onus on senders to figure out how to send mail to people who want it.

It also means that Gmail is a more realistic view into what subscribers think about a mail stream. It’s easy to forget that everyone who hits this-is-spam actually gave the sender an email address in the first place. The fact that senders can’t just remove them from the mailing program, means the poor reputation builds up over time. Eventually, the number of complaints is going to go over whatever the appropriate threshold level is, and there’s no easy way to reduce it.

I’m not sure what the solution is. I do know that bad reputations at Gmail take some significant work to repair. There’s no short cut, senders have to get rid of subscribers who don’t like the mail. Identifying those subscribers can be a challenge. We’ve had good luck with some clients, but for others the fixes are a significant challenge and tough for their business model to absorb. The good news is that the pain can be short lived and we’ve been able to ramp mail back up eventually.

Overall, Gmail delivery is harder than a lot of other places. Some of that is because senders use FBLs as a crutch to avoid having effective data hygiene on their signups. That works for those ISPs that send FBL messages, but isn’t so effective at Gmail. Maybe there’s some specific hygiene to do just on Gmail addresses. Working on a better solution than just aggressive hygiene and friction during signup.

Listbombing Webinar
It's that time of year

Related Posts

Gmail pilots new FBL

Yes, it’s true. Gmail announced last Thursday at M3AAWG that they were piloting a new Feedback loop.
The Gmail FBL is currently for ESPs only. The announcement during MAAWG was that only MAAWG ESP members were eligible. They are requiring a DKIM signature for the FBL, but ESPs using individual customer d= values can get a FBL based on IPs. They are also not providing ANY information that reveals the complainer. Gmail’s intention is only to give ESPs feedback so that ESPs can prevent abuse. They are not giving feedback so complainers can be removed.
The email has a .csv attachment that has 3 columns: date, identifier and complaint rate.
The identifier is an ESP provided customer identifier. One of the ESPs I talked to said they were adding an X-header into their emails.
I’ve heard from beta testers that there is a minimum of 100 complaints before you’ll get any report.
Reports are sent daily if there is sufficient traffic to trigger them.
If you’re a MAAWG member, check the senders list for the signup URL.

Read More

Listbombing Webinar

Earlier this week I gave a webinar hosted by the EEC and the DMA discussing the listbombing problem. They will be making the recording available later this week and I will link to it then.
I wish I could say the issue was done and over with and that it was something we don’t have to worry about any longer. Unfortunately, that’s just not the case. Attacks are ongoing. Many of them are being caught and mitigated, but they’re still occurring.
We can’t let up our guard, though. Attackers will adapt to the mitigations and negate them.
And remember, listbombing is a sign that your subscription process is not collecting accurate data. If Evil Bob or Dumb Bob can give you Real Bob’s address then your data is all suspect. The problem is somewhat in the form, but it’s also in the whole process. What steps can you take to verify data without creating too much friction in the process?
This is an opportunity for forward thinking companies to reconsider their subscription and address acquisition processes. How do we get Bob’s address and information without Evil Bob or Dumb Bob giving us bad data and without contributing to the overall abuse online.
 

Read More

Sendgrid's open letter to Gmail

Paul Kincaid-Smith wrote an open letter to Gmail about their experiences with the Gmail FBL and how the data from Gmail helped Sendgrid find problem customers.
I know a lot of folks are frustrated with Gmail not returning more than statistics, but there is a place for this type of feedback within a comprehensive compliance desk.

Read More