Raising the standard

Last week news broke that Mailchimp had disconnected a number of anti-vaccination activists from their platform and banned anti-vax content. I applaud their decision and hope other companies will follow their lead in banning harmful content from their network.


Measuring stick with an arrow and the words "you must be this tall to ride the ride."

These kinds of decisions, where providers say you can’t do that on our network, are because these are private platforms. As I talked about recently, they own the platform, they make the rules.

The same ownership that gives ESPs the right to ban content, also gives them the ability to enforce deliverability standards. These are the rules they enforce on customers to ensure a reasonable reputation. What kind of rules will a good ESP implement and enforce?

  1. Identify yourself and your company with accurate information. Be upfront and transparent about who you are and what you mail at the point of address collection.
  2. Collect permission directly. Do not outsource your permission to a third party. This means no co-reg, no renting lists, no purchasing lists.
  3. Respect your recipients. Do send email at the right cadence for your particular audience. Remove unengaged users who do not interact with your mail for an extended period of time.
  4. Respect the recipient domain rules. Set appropriate limits on the number of connections and sending speed. Handle bounces correctly. Don’t keep connections open for longer than necessary. Don’t allow customers to send spam.

How ESPs enforce these rules depends on the ESP. Some are more proactive than others. Any decent ESP is going to have a deliverability and/or compliance team that monitors for complaints and blocks and other obvious signs of deliverability problems. But the monitoring doesn’t stop there. There are a number of tools that have recently entered the market that allow ESPs to measure the quality of their customers’ data.

ESPs also monitor things like opens and clicks and engagement statistics. Customers who fall below standard thresholds are asked to improve their lists. For some senders this seems invasive and problematic. But responsible and legitimate senders know that removing unresponsive addresses benefits them. Even if they lose a few might-eventually-respond-someday addresses, there is significant long term benefit to maintaining an engaged list.

Enforcing good practices and data hygiene is expensive and can cause some hard feelings among customers. Companies who don’t enforce minimum standards can often find themselves in a downward spiral headed towards failure. I’ve worked with some of the ESPs in the past, and it’s never a good position.

ESPs that do enforce standards and good deliverability practices have customers that reach the inbox more effectively. Their raising of the standards bar often means smaller lists. But those smaller lists have a bigger reach and are more profitable for their owners.

Measurements
Increase in Barracuda IP blocks

Related Posts

Arguing against the anti-spam policy

Not long ago I was talking with a colleague who works for an ESP.  She was telling me about this new client who is in the process of negotiating a contract. Normally she doesn’t get involved in negotiations, but the sales group brought her. It seems this new client is attempting to remove all mention of the anti-spam policy from the contract. As she is the deliverability and compliance person, the sales people won’t agree unless compliance does.
Her sales team needs props for bringing her in to negotiate a contract where the anti-spam clause is removed.
This isn’t that unusual situation. Many well managed ESPs will include deliverability and compliance personnel in negotiations if the customer indicates they want changes to the language of the anti spam clause.
On the face of thing it seems reasonable for customers to want to negotiate compliance terms. They want to protect themselves from unexpected outages. It seems irresponsible to allow a service provider to have the ability to made such a business affecting decision.
Many folks try to negotiate their way out of anti-spam clauses. Just asking for changes isn’t a big deal. However, some companies push the issue with sales and contract folks to an extreme. They threaten to not sign if the anti-spam clauses are removed completely. ContractForBlog
Threatening a contract over compliance issues can poison an entire working relationship. The fact is that most people who argue about anti-spam clauses and compliance issues are people who have had problems with other ESPs in the past. For better or worse, prospects that try and remove anti-spam clauses from contracts are often problem customers.
On the compliance side, if someone is pushing hard to get the spam clause removed, they think a few different things:

Read More

ESPs and deliverability

There’s an ongoing discussion, one I normally avoid, regarding how much impact an ESP has on deliverability. Overall, my opinion is that as long as you have a half way decent ESP they have no impact on deliverability. Then I started writing an email and realised that my thoughts are more complex than that.

Read More

ESPs are failing recipients

Over the last few years I’ve reduced the complaints I send to ESPs about their customers to almost nothing. The only companies I send complaints to are ones where I actually know folks inside the compliance desk, and I almost never expect action, I just send them as professional courtesy.

Read More