Your opt-out process could be affecting your reputation. This might sound counter-intuitive, but ease of opt-out can be critical in protecting your email reputation. It is important that the opt-out process is made as easy and transparent as possible.

Customers receive a growing number of emails that they’ve subscribed to but are no longer particularly interested in. While email clients are working to filter these, there is the very real danger that consumers can simply hit the spam button to permanently remove them. Given that spam reports are fundamental to your reputation with ISPs as a trusted email provider, this can have disastrous consequences on the deliverability of all future campaigns.

Email marketers need to make it easier for customers to manage their subscriptions, even if this means that they ultimately decide to unsubscribe. Ensure that every email is clear about where subscribers have to click to opt-out. If the process isn’t instantaneous, manage expectations and let them know that they may receive some additional emails over a specified and short period of time.

To lessen the risk of complete disengagement, marketers can offer customers the opportunity to “opt-down” rather than opt-out by allowing customers to quickly and easily:

• Reduce the frequency of emails,
• Opt-out of some communications but also opt-in to new ones, or
• Further refine preferences so they get what they want.

In either scenario, you can use the process to gain more valuable data from customers, asking them to share their reasons for leaving and provide suggestions on how to improve your email communications. In making opt-out and opt-down more customer-centric, you can protect your reputation both with ISPs and with customers.

For more information on protecting your email reputation and improving deliverability, download Experian Marketing Service’s white paper, Three pillars of successful email deliverability: Ensuring safe arrival and optimum placement in the inbox

Obviously there could be an endless number of reason for this perception, and many of them probably stem back to the days when deliverability was just becoming an important topic of conversation. Back then, many people were unsure of what deliverability really was, they just knew that it was important and there were not a lot of people in the industry who were considered to be experts in the field. From there I believe ESP sales folks most likely used their in-house experts as a way to differentiate themselves from others, which continued this sense of only a few “experts” really understanding what deliverability really was.

So is this still true today? Personally I don’t think so because if you look at most delivery issues they come down to 4 things.

1. Unknown users — these are email addresses that are no longer valid and should not be mailed. If a sender has too many of these addresses on their list, the ISPs will look at that as though they either are not following best practices and cleaning their list, or they just don’t care about their users.
2. Complaints — when a user marks your message as “Spam” or “Junk” that is considered a complaint by the ISPs and it is their best way to understand if users want your email. If you get too many of these they view that as people don’t really want your mail (even if they signed up for it) and they will begin to bulk or block your mail.
3. Spamtraps — this is one of the most severe issues when talking about deliverability. A spamtrap is an email address that has either never signed up for any marketing messages (pristine trap) or an email address that has been closed and bounced as an unknown user (see above) for at least 6-12 months (recycled) and then reopened by anti-spam organizations to track if senders are keeping their lists clean. By hitting spamtraps, not only are you not processing your bounces correctly but if you hit a pristine account you would not have any type of opt-in for that account, which signifies to the ISPs that you are not following best practices.
4. Engagement — this is the newest factor when it comes to deliverability and while not all ISPs are currently taking this into account, many of the top tier are, with others close behind. When talking about engagement many of the ISPs are looking at a number of factors including opens, read time, forwards, clicks etc. They are able to use the data that they can collect to see how often and for how long people are “engaged” with your campaigns, which means that as marketers we must ensure that our campaigns are relevant to the customers we are sending it to.

So remember, deliverability is not some black box or dark science, it is rather simply: keep your list clean, follow best practices and make sure that your content is relevant to your customers.

Good luck and good sending!

Here is a quick and easy reference guide by Experian CheetahMail to help you follow point of sale email acquisition best practices. Remember, best practices start before point of sale and continue after the transaction.

For more information on managing compliance, privacy and deliverability with in-store email acquisition, download our latest Point of sale email white paper.

The creation of this specification is one that we believe aligns closely with one of our core businesses here at Experian CheetahMail-eliminating messaging abuse and protecting recipients from the fraudulent behaviors of other senders. While we believe that this technology is something that all senders should investigate and eventually implement, we believe those that are in the financial services industry, or otherwise have witnessed phishing attacks against the brand, should be the first to determine their company’s strategy with regards to DMARC. For most companies this will involve working across different departments, such as marketing, IT and security.

For those of you that have been in the email industry for some time you might remember when Yahoo! created a special relationship with Ebay/PayPal to reject messages that were not signed with the DomainKeys authentication protocol and stop phishing emails that were coming into their system claiming to be from these companies. DMARC, which stands for “Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting & Conformance” has taken that same premise and grown it. DMARC standardizes how email receivers validate messaging using the well-known SPF and DKIM authentication protocols. A DMARC policy allows a sender to indicate that their emails are protected by SPF and/or DKIM, and tells a receiver what to do if neither of those authentication methods passes – such as deliver messaging to another folder such as spam or junk or reject the message altogether. DMARC removes some of the guesswork from the receiver’s handling of these failed messages, limiting or eliminating the user’s exposure to potentially fraudulent & harmful messages. DMARC also provides a way for the email receiver to report back to the sender about messages that pass and/or fail DMARC evaluation so they can potentially take action against those fraudulent senders.

An important aspect of the DMARC specification that is unique as compared to other similar initiatives that have come out before it, is that it allows the sender to determine what the ISP’s should do with messages that fail, and it doesn’t have to be an all or nothing approach. There is also no charge for senders to implement this technology. A sender can simply tell the ISPs not to do anything with failed messages, to quarantine a certain percentage of the failed mail or fully block any messages that fail and claim to be from their brand.

Over the years I have seen a number of similar proposals come into our industry and it always seems as though we have a chicken and the egg issue. Usually what happens is the ISPs say that they will start checking for the newest form of authentication once enough senders are using it. While on the other hand the sender community says that it isn’t worth their time to implement something if none of the ISPs are checking for it. The great thing about DMARC is that not only was this created by both senders and receivers there are many folks on both sides that are already using and checking for it. We currently know of at least 4 of the largest receivers in the world that are either currently checking for DMARC policies or finalizing their implementation of it . There are also a number of senders that are already publishing these records and it will only continue to grow.

We believe DMARC is an important step in order to continue to ensure the on-going health of our email eco-system and an important implementation for many senders, especially those at risk of being spoofed or phished. Experian CheetahMail will continue to monitor any changes to this latest initiative, or any other new industry developments to reduce messaging abuse and work to ensure that you are kept up to date on any additional developments.

In his new role as head of Global Email Deliverability, Spencer will provide Experian CheetahMail clients with valuable strategic and tactical insights on how they can stay in their customers’ Inboxes, as well as educate clients about the latest deliverability trends and industry best practices.

Spencer will be leading a session on the topic of deliverability and email ROI at the Email Sender & Provider Coalition (ESPC) Annual Meeting in Washington DC, September 11.

Never one to shy away from tough questions, Spencer sat down with us for a quick Q&A about his new role and approach to today’s deliverability challenges.

Q. What does your new role as Director of Global Delivery Services mean for Experian Marketing Services’ CheetahMail and its clients?

A. My responsibility is to create and deliver programs that enable our clients to connect with their customers and increase the ROI of their email marketing initiatives. Programs will focus on defining and executing sending practices that both respect what the receiving community expects out of communications from their favorite brands, and that also fit within each of our client’s business model.

Q. What about this role interested you the most?

A. There were a number of things that excited me about this role. First of all, Experian CheetahMail has always been known for its exceptional service and if I can help maintain and build on that within the deliverability realm, then it presents a great opportunity for our clients. Secondly, CheetahMail is a global company with offices throughout the world, and to be able to work across regions to help clients understand not only the ISP’s requirements and expectations, but also how customers in different regions approach and use the email marketing channel, is something that I think our client base will find valuable.

Q. How long have you been focused on deliverability?

A. I got my start in 2004 when I began working for a company by the name of Accucast (which was later purchased by Premiere Global Services). Back then there were very few people that actually focused on deliverability as a full time job. A number of folks would simply handle an ISP issue as a one off situation, rather than looking at the big picture and trying to understand the entire ecosystem. I come from a marketing background, whereas (and especially in the beginning), many of those that came into the field of deliverability came from an anti-spam/blacklist type background. Because of my marketing background, I think I have a bit of a unique perspective. I have always tended to take a more proactive approach to delivery issues, versus simply reacting to a situation and often responding after it is too late.

Q. What do you think will be different with regards to the deliverability industry in the next 2-5 years?

A. A lot of what we will be talking about in 2-5 years won’t be all that different from what we talk about with many folks now, just on a much larger scale and with more focus on end-user engagement. As engagement continues to become a determining factor in terms of what messages the ISPs will deliver to an Inbox, deliverability will play a more significant role in an email marketers overall strategy and plan.
Now, that is not to say that there won’t be drastic changes in the way we look at email best practices as a whole in the next 2-5 years. If I were to look back at when I first started in this industry and someone would have told me that there would be an entire business model based on the simple task of emailing their entire list everyday, I probably would have told them they were crazy. See back when I started, no one would have thought this was a good idea, there is something called email fatigue, and brands understood that if you mailed your customers too often they would then unsubscribe and you no longer had the opportunity to make money off of them. And at most, brands were sending one email per week. Today, we have so many different daily deal sites that many in the industry think this level of frequency is the norm. Of course I have always said that it really depends on what works best for your brand, your business model and your customers.

The one thing I don’t think will change is that email is all about relevancy. If you are sending messages to your customers with information/offers that they want, you will continue to see high inbox percentages, open rates and click thrus. But if you are sending them email just to send more, they are less likely to be engaged with your brand and more likely to unsubscribe or complain about your messages.

So what does using a hammer versus a crowbar have to do with email marketing and deliverability? It is all about using all the tools you have to produce the best product as quickly as possible. In email marketing, there are a number of tools I often find many people are not using in order to better understand what is — and what isn’t — working effectively within their email campaigns.

You can use a number of tools to evaluate the success of your campaigns. Most marketers are using the reports that are available from their sending platform, or ESP. These reports are the first step toward understanding what your overall reputation is with the domains you send to. From the reports, you can gather information on how much of your mail is being accepted at the Internet service providers (ISPs), what clicks your customers are acting on, and which users no longer find your information relevant to their needs and unsubscribe.

The next important email marketing tool is seed listing, which can help you understand what happens with your emails once the ISPs accept the messages. You can receive a statistically significant sample of what the ISPs are doing with your messages based on default antispam settings. While a seed list that shows a 100 percent inbox rate doesn’t guarantee that all of your mail actually landed in the inbox, it does give you another way to understand the effectiveness of your email marketing efforts.

Finally, the latest available tool allows you to see where your email was opened on a user-by-user basis, helping you to understand how each individual interacts with your brand and your marketing campaigns. For example, let’s say I received a message from your company. If you were using one of these diagnostic tools, you might see that I opened your message on my iPhone at 7:30 a.m. (while getting the kids ready for school) and then again at 10 a.m. in Outlook. This type of information helps the marketer understand a number of things — most importantly, who the most engaged users are and how they view messages. By knowing that I opened it twice on two different devices, you now know that I found the message compelling enough to go back and open it again. You also know that in the future if you optimize your messages for the iPhone or have a new app available, you can segment me into the iPhone group and send me a specific targeted message.

So by using the tools in your email marketing toolbox, you can not only better understand what is effective and what isn’t, but you also can utilize the information to improve on future mailings and continue to increase your return on investment.

Good luck and good sending.

What is the best course of action for the highest ROI?

There are a number of services providers that have proprietary processes to correct approximately 20% to 50% of records that are not +4 coded or have a missing/invalid secondary (apartment) number. However, even after this hygiene processing, there will most likely still be 1% to 3% of records with deliverability issues. Now the questions become: Should all of these be mailed? Should none of these be mailed? What is the best course of action for the highest ROI?

Even though a record has deliverability issues, it doesn’t mean it won’t get delivered. Here are two examples:

Jane Jetson
124 Main St
Saint Cloud, MN  56301

Jane’s address is not +4 coded because 124 Main St is not a valid delivery point. However, 123 Main St. is valid and is, in fact, where Jane Jetson actually lives. Because of this, there is a strong likelihood this mail piece will be delivered.

Fred Flintstone
456 Oak River Run Apt C3
Saint Cloud MN  56301

Fred’s deliverability issue is an invalid apartment number.  Instead of C3 it is 3C. In this case, there is also a very strong likelihood this mail piece will be delivered.

The goal for marketers is to identify and drop records with deliverability issues performing below breakeven to ensure they only mail to the most effective set of records. Over the past year I’ve worked with a top 200, top 100 and a top 50 retailer whose breakeven deliverability analysis saved them each between $900,000 and $1.7M annually.

How would it affect your budget if you had similar results? If direct mail is a critical part of your marketing ecosystem today, read more about breakeven deliverability analysis.

Last month, Yahoo! encouraged customers to de-clutter and ”Spring Clean” their inboxes by getting a new Yahoo! email account. Email spring cleaning shouldn’t be limited to a consumer’s inbox; it’s also a great opportunity for marketers to clean up their email files. According to Fresh Address, 30% of subscribers change their email addresses annually or become inactive. Sending to inactive addresses may negatively impact your reputation, and ultimately deliverability of your email. So, to optimize your inbox placement rate, we recommend that you spring clean your marketing list.

To start, CheetahMail’s Deliverability and Strategic Services teams recommend that you define the level of engagement of your customers that represent the inactive on your subscriber file and separate these into levels of inactivity. We also recommend considering additional segmentation of these inactive groups (no opens and no clicks; opens and no clicks) identified within the past 12 months based on a variety of factors such as the data source, the subscriber’s tenure, or transaction information.

Our Deliverability and Strategic Services teams emphasize the importance of testing and suggest developing a reactivation series, including ending the series with a reconfirmation email, to test the reaction to different factors (price, exclusive service, different channels, etc.) for the group of contacts who have opened but not clicked. In parallel, for the group without any opens or clicks we recommend sending a series of up to 4-6 reconfirmation emails (opt in permission pass), up to one per week, for the duration of the spring cleaning initiative.

For the subscribers who open or click, but don’t confirm, silo them separately and continue trying to reactivate, but at a reduced frequency. Anyone who reconfirms can be bucketed back into the active segment of your file with a specific communication stream to immerse them back in your flow. The outliers that didn’t reconfirm or re-engage through this series should be removed from your mailings. Of course, we always recommend to continue business as usual with a control group to measure the impact on your email program.

This spring cleaning of your file will help you establish a clean sending reputation, and optimal deliverability with the ISPs.

There are two types of NCOA^Link processing available – Full Service Providers with 48 months of change of address (COA) data and Limited Service Providers/End User Mailers with 18 months of COA data. Unfortunately, some who use NCOA^Link regularly (monthly or bi-monthly) don’t understand the differences between the 18 and 48 month databases or the benefits they provide.

In four recent tests, each of the mailers used a Limited Service Provider for the previous year for their processing.  When these files were matched to the Full Service NCOA^Link database, the overall average match rate was 1.66%.  Of these matches, just over one half of one percent (or 34 percent of the total matches) had a Move Effective Date that was over 18 months old, which means they would not be picked up by a Limited Service Provider.

Coding additional records with ZIP+4^™ codes and correcting some of the records with missing/invalid information by using proprietary processes beyond CASS™ also means a significant number of additional valid NCOA^Link matches will be identified. In four tests against four other Full Service Providers who did not have these proprietary processes, there was an average of 7.5% additional valid NCOA^Link matches that they did not get.  One word of warning about these proprietary services – there are some companies offering these today where the quality is not good, so you need to be careful of which service provider you use to do this.

The sequence of processing that includes NCOA^Link can also provide significant benefits if done correctly. Running NCOA^Link before identifying duplicates will identify additional movers. In a recent test for a large mailer, my company moved 3.86% of the records via NCOA^Link.   Of these moves, 19.6% of them became duplicates.  This increased the number of duplicates identified by 2.42% or by .75% of the input records.

But there is also value in running NCOA^Link again just before the file goes to the printer.  This is primarily due to the move dynamics in the U.S.  Since NCOA^Link is updated weekly and 15 percent of the population moves each year, typically for every week since NCOA^Link was last run, about one quarter of one percent of the records being processed will have moved. It is cost effective to run Last Effort COA for almost all of our clients where it has been two weeks or more since NCOA^Link was last run.

Using all or some of the recommendations below when using NCOA^Link® will provide significant benefits to your company :

Use a full service provider for NCOA^Link processing. For those companies with an end-user license or those who are currently using a Limited Service Provider, at least semi-annually and possibly even quarterly, records should be processed by a Full Service Provider to pick up older moves that would otherwise be missed. 

• Use a service provider that has proprietary processes to accurately apply ZIP+4^TM codes to additional records and correct records with missing/invalid apartment numbers.  If your current provider does not have these capabilities, at least twice a year have your database cleaned by a company that does have these capabilities and that accurately makes the adjustments to the address.
• Run NCOA^Link® before deduping to identify additional valid duplicates.
• Consider running Last Effort COA if it has been two weeks or more since NCOA^Link was last run on the records

Applying these recommendations could provide a benefit of about $20 per thousand records mailed in terms of increased response and reduced wasted advertising.

In addition, companies who apply these steps will improve mailing results while having a more accurate and complete view of customers.

Successful delivery of an email to a specific consumer is just as important as the message being sent. Maintaining a clean email database improves deliverability rates and will ultimately increase overall conversion rates. Here are three simple steps that marketers can take to cleanse email address files:

1. Remove bounced emails – Obviously it doesn’t make sense to send an email to the same inaccurate address over and over again. Removing known invalid emails from a list will not only reduce bounce rates, it will have an impact on the company’s reputation with the Internet Service Providers (ISP). Each email domain earns a reputation with the major ISPs, like Gmail™ and Hotmail. Emails sent from that domain receive placement in a consumer’s inbox based on the positive or negative nature of the sender’s reputation. If too many emails bounce, then an ISP may consider the sender a spammer and place emails in the spam or junk inbox, or even prevent delivery of the communication. Keeping the bounce rate low can improve or maintain a sender’s reputation.
2. Cleanse email addresses – Most bounced emails are the result of syntax errors, like misspellings or typographical errors. Software tools can identify and correct invalid characters and change incorrectly typed domain names. These “cleans” can be done on a weekly or monthly basis, depending on email volume.
3. Educate staff – It is important to train staff members on the importance of an accurate email address. If staff members understand where information is used and how inaccurate data affects the organization as whole, they may be more careful when collecting data in the future and reduce the number of careless errors made during entry.
   By removing inaccurate information, cleansing existing addresses and training staff, marketers can increase the number of usable email addresses in their existing database. Ultimately, more delivered emails means more opens and clicks, and of course, better marketing results.

Check back for weekly peeks into the 2012 Digital Marketer, to be released in March. Click here to pre-order the report, and follow the conversation on Twitter at #EMS2012.