[Re: Loose Cannon: The High Cost of a Free Medium, Direct Newsline May 19, 2002, Letters to the Editor, May 20-21]
Outstanding exchanges on the article. It seems this is becoming a ‘hot’ button for all of us DIY/DM folks. Certainly there is no easy or ‘off the rack’ solution. I tend to agree with the filtering software model, and agree that while detailed segmentation costs, it tends to create the ROI we are all after (hopefully).
Currently, we are talking with our ISP about their spam policies as we gear up to roll out a new campaign. We want to make sure that our ISP is on board with our efforts to help minimize the negative reaction.
It’s always an interesting sidebar that we in the U.S. have been desensitized to ‘junk’/bulk post mail over a period of half a century. My mom used to love to open the PCH entries when we were kids.
I feel the current pace of business, combined with aggressive competition, lower margins, and commoditization (10 point Scrabble word) of micro markets/micro segments have created a volatile reactionary response when it comes to irresponsible electronic and phone solicitation. Unfortunately, what our teachers told us in the 3rd grade is true – we all pay for the actions of a few ‘bad apples’!
The truth is that responsible DMers will win and survive at the end of the day. If a cost/per/email model ends up being the solution, DMers will evaluate the cost vs. ROI and react/employ it accordingly.
I have a funny feeling that a more likely scenario (at least one I would be more likely to back) is a subscription service backed by ISPs, where a monthly charge for bandwidth use of bulk messaging is the model. The DMer would have a service mark on the email that shows the legitimacy of the message, that the ISP supports it, and that shows the DMer is a business worthy of messaging. Similar (I suppose) to the BBB code of business ethics idea put in place decades ago (Hey – maybe they should look at this to resurrect their income?).
Thanks!
Joel Brazy
Marketing Manager
Full Compass Systems
Middleton, WI
* * * * *
As a supporter of an economic solution to spam, I wanted to respond to the letters opposing the idea of attaching a cost to e-mail.
One thing the United States Postal Service is good at is keeping mail volume down. While most marketers agree that they have gotten a bit too good at it, the fact is evident every day when I compare the number of messages I receive online vs. offline.
Their secret is postage. Because it costs money to mail, only successful mailings are sustainable. The invisible hand of the marketplace is in Darwinian charge, and only the strong survive in the mail stream.
While filters, white lists, and challenge technology offer some hope, their cost may in the end be greater than a simple, penny a piece toll, levied at the domestic ISP port of entry, payable in advance by the sender, no matter how great or small, generally by credit card.
It is perfectly understandable that many legitimate marketers’ initial instinct may be to oppose such a fee, whether it be a nickel, or in my proposal, the “penny a piece solution”. Ideally, e-mail would remain virtually free, everybody would target, and no one would object to receiving.
But in the real world, there are irresponsible spammers who take advantage of the system to the extent that nationally televised FTC hearings are held and federal legislation looms. They don’t pay the costs of targeting or legitimate address acquisition. They take advantage of the electronic commons, spoiling it for all.
The utopian days of dot.com wine and roses are over. Free lunch never lasts. There are many benefits to sustainable business models wherein things cost money and you have to make more than you spend. Freedom from inept nuisances is among them. Isn’t that worth a penny a piece?
Terry Nugent
Director of Marketing
Medical Marketing Service, Inc. (MMS)
Wood Dale, IL
* * * * *
Dave Hendricks made a good point that deserves follow-up. When I was buying permissioned e-mail lists for media subscription offers, the cost rolled-up to exceed the cost for snail mail lists. There were very cheap e-lists but these remained highly suspect (Were they served? Was there permission? How accurate was their demos?).
A list as described from sites that do what Dave said cost quite a lot, and deservedly so. In fact, more than most people would imagine. Our average CPM for list purchases exceeded $125 and some above $300/M. add creative, serving; reporting and costs exceeded $275/M. No, we did not pay for printing. And contrary to Dave, and maybe because of the creative (Hey, not everything is well-crafted!), we rarely saw results that equaled or exceeded our snail mail programs.
Now, add that 5 cents and the advantage slips to a push. Oh sure, e-mail marketing does open into instant fulfillment, instant metrics but when the e-economics equals the cost of snail mail then e-mail marketing usage would quickly decline. I would rather see the technology improve which would benefit everyone. I would prefer a different approach than a surcharge. Maybe we are jumping the gun? How long have we endured e-mail Spam anyway? How many decades?
John Galavan
Development
Seattle Publishing, Inc.
Gutenberg Publishing System
Seattle, WA
Network
