Recent Posts

Technology does not trump policy when it comes to delivery

Recently Ken Magill wrote an article looking at how an ESP was attempting to sell him services based on the ESPs ‘high deliverability rates.’ I commented that Ken was right, and I still think he is.
Ken has a followup article today. In the first part he thanks Matt Blumberg from Return Path for posting a thoughtful blog post on the piece. Matt did have a very thoughtful article, pointing out that the vast majority of things affecting delivery are under the control of the list owner, not under the control of the ESP. As they are both right, I clearly agree with them. I’ve also posted about reputation and delivery regularly.

Goodmail sued for patent infringement

Late last week RPost sued Goodmail for infringing two patents. One patent authenticates content and delivery of documents. The second verifies the message was received by the recipient.
Patent #6,182,219: Apparatus and method for authenticating the dispatch and contents of documents.

Compliance vs. Deliverability

Most people I know handling delivery issues for senders have some version of delivery or deliverability in their job title. But as I talk to them about what they do on a daily basis, their role is as much policy enforcement and compliance as it is delivery. Sure, what they’re telling customers and clients is how to improve delivery, but that is often in the context of making customers comply with relevant terms and conditions.
Some delivery folks also work the abuse desk, handling complaints and FBLs and actually putting blocks on customer sends.
I think the compliance part of the delivery job description that is often overlooked and severely downplayed. No one likes to be the bad guy. None of us like handling the angry customer on the phone who has had their vital email marketing program shut down by their vendor. None of us like the internal political battles to convince management to adopt stricter customer policies. All of these things, however, are vital to delivery.
Despite the lack of emphasis on compliance and enforcement they are a vital and critical part of the deliverabilty equation.

Hidden cost of email blasts

Seth Godin has a post up today talking about how friction, that is the cost of sending marketing, is good for marketing. With more friction, marketers make choices about sending instead of sending to everyone.
The post touches on a point I’ve certainly tried to explain to clients and senders in general.

Your delivery is yours, not your ESPs

Ken is right. As he almost always is.

I received a cold-call voicemail yesterday from a representative of an e-mail service provider looking to do a barter deal.
Never mind I’m not the person to approach for barter deals—or any other type of non-editorial issue, for that matter—the sales rep made one statement that made me cringe.
“Our delivery rates are very high,” she said.
That statement has no place in a pitch from an e-mail service provider.
Read More

Apparent changes at mail.com

I was poking around at some DNS this weekend and happened to do a MX lookup for mail.com and noticed something changed. Previously mail.com mail was handled by Outblaze (now owned by IBM). It seems, though, that mail.com is now outsourcing their mail delivery to AOL.

Marketing to businesses

“If you do stupid things, you’re going to get blocked,” says Jigsaw CEO Jim Fowler in an interview with Ken Magill earlier this week.
Jigsaw is a company that rewards members to input their valuable business contacts. Once the addresses are input into Jigsaw, they are sold to anyone who wants them. Jigsaw gets the money, the people providing information get… something, the people who provided business cards to Jigsaw members get spammed and the people who downloaded the lists get to deal with a delivery mess. Sounds like a lose for everyone but Jigsaw.
Except that now Jigsaw is listed on the SBL for spam support services. Well, that’s going to cause some business challenges, particularly given how many companies use the SBL as part of their filtering scheme.
It’s hard to think of a situation where I would appreciate someone I gave a business card to providing my information to a site that then turns around and lets anyone download it to send email to. I know, I know, there are a million companies out there I’ve never heard of that have The Product that will Solve All my Problems. But, really, I don’t want them in my work mailbox. The address I give out on my business cards is, for, y’know, people to contact me about what I’m selling or to contact me about things they’ve already purchased from me. That address is not for people to market to. I have other addresses for vendors, and even potential vendors, to contact me.
Jigsaw clearly facilitates spam to businesses by collecting email addresses and then selling them on. This is a drain on small businesses who now have inboxes full of valuable offers to wade through. Perhaps their stint on the SBL will make them reconsider their spam support services.
HT: Al

Links for Sept 10, 2009

As everyone else has been announcing, the Tucows FBL is taking applications from the general public. I’ve updated the ISP Information page to link to the signup as well.
Loren McDonald has a blog up at MediaPost talking about how the language marketers use (Blast!) affects how they are perceived in the industry. I think he’s quite correct. Many people on the senders side hear thing things marketers say and judge that the markters are contemptuous of not only the ISPs but also the recipients. Language matters!
Pivotal Veracity announced MailboxIQ this week. This technology allows senders to track what individual users do to their email. Senders are now able to measure inbox / bulk performance for their whole list, not just seed addresses. The delivery person in me thinks this will help senders make better decisions about engaged recipients and give them more data to send mail that recipients want. The rest of me is a bit unhappy with marketers finding a new way to invade people’s privacy. I’m just glad that I don’t use webmail except for handling client issues.
In other news, Mailchimp has been trolling through their client’s response data and discovered that recipients using gmail.com are more engaged and responsive than users at other domains.

DKIM implementation survey: prelim results

First off, I want to thank everyone who participated in the DKIM implementation survey. This week has been pretty hectic so far, so I haven’t had a chance to actually dig down into the data from the survey, but I thought I’d post some preliminary results.
The ESP survey had 45 respondents. 30% of those sent more than 15 million emails a month.
Of all the respondents: 40% are signing with Domain Keys, 51.1% are signing with DKIM.
Of all respondents: 79.5% are signing with Domain Keys and 78.8% are signing with DKIM to access services (whitelists or FBLs) provided by the ISPs.
50% of those not signing with Domain Keys are not doing so because customers have not requested it. 61% of those not signing with DKIM are not doing it because of technical difficulties with deployment.
The ISP survey had 16 respondents, with 37.5% handling less than 500,000 mailboxes and 18.8% handling more than 15 million mailboxes. 75% of respondents said they are not checking Domain Keys on inbound mail. 56% said they are not currently checking DKIM on inbound mail.
Only 10 ISPs answered the question if they plan to check either Domain Keys or DKIM.

Permission is not a legal concept

One trap I see companies fall into when looking at opt-in and permission is they seem to think that permission is a blanket thing. They believe permission can be bought and sold by the companies that collected email addresses.