thoughts on mass emails

[mike herman]

In trying to determine why over 50% of my mass emails get no views and no clicks, I set up a test email address on a second computer that uses the internet provider for its email address. What i saw was surprising.
In one mass email letter, the first test of this address, the email was delivered right to the trash bin. I moved it to the inbox and Outlook immediately sent it back to the trash bin. I dragged it again to the inbox and it stayed there this time. (No normal respondent would do this. It would simply be ignored.)
On the next mass email delivery, it didn't even show up. It simply wasn't delivered. And the next time was the same, and the next time was the same. That email address shows 0 opens and 0 clicks.
The conclusion is that the internet provider settings are determining that these are trash and not even delivering them but instead are blocking them.
There is no way to fight something like that. I have a slew of email respondents that have never opened or clicked any of the mass emails.
I have modified my email settings, eliminated junk mail language, gone to a completely text email and the best results I have managed to achieve is 45% opened.
So, is it better to delete the emails that have never opened and clicked or just leave them because they water down the percentages of unsubscribes. I have only ever had 2 spam complaints.

[GFXJames]

Servers have filters for spam, it is in their heuristics to detect certain behaviors as spam. You get even sometimes very aggressive filters in the server of the people you are writing to. I lost a client (just doing a 1 on 1 mail, I've never done mass mailing in my personal activity/freelancing) because MS Hotmail/Outlook server (it seems their filters are more aggressive than others, for all I know, not the single data about it) simply I sent two mails with very short spam of time between them (seconds). Any user can be flagged for spam if doing this. But is a bit random. You might do it and most of the times wont be filtered out.  It was us dealing with the gig specs, details, in normal exchange, but she thought I never answered her, and me that she has had a change of heart--- > gig lost. (and it was a portrait, my favorite type of project. Sigh) Sometimes is because the server you are using has already been blacklisted by some black sheep, even if most of its users are legit (but the entire server got black listed for complaints of several individuals about the bad user). There are many sites on inet for prestige about that, and sometimes is difficult to know if your server is fine or not (but can be checked). MANY times is something you are introducing in your mail code, or, the type of subject, that is triggering a HUGE red alert in the filtering systems, without you even knowing.

In the end, IMO, safest possibility is using some SaaS that is used to avoid these things and maintain a clean reputation of its servers. I know all these (without being an expert) things from my years at latest company, one of my tasks was handling part of that, and doing all the freaking 1996-like html that the mails can only have to be supported by a 99% of the mail reading systems.  And that meant using : Campaignmonitor (one of the most friendly UIs), Mailchimp ( a very nice solution, big user base) , and Sendgrid (more possibilities if you are a programmer and system person, as allows certain integrations. I like it less, though. But is very well considered). I think most people go with Mailchimp, of the three...

Also, some mail apps, software, in the readers side, will add up to that server filtering, by as well "over detecting" as spam everything the thing believes to be spammy. So, is a lot of things that can trigger that which you have to be aware of. I always made the two versions : text and html+graphics versions, the 3 systems have that even offering you an auto parsed text version, but I preferred to always give it my last review and touches. Avoid all sort of javascript, btw. We never ever included attachments, as well. It can even be the graphics URLs, or how are you attaching the graphics. A lot of these things, if not all, are kind of ensured by those services to go in a safer way for you (and the readers). And... till certain number (not sure if I'm remembering right that it was around 500 addresses for several), several of these are free, with limitations. And then, there's different pricing according to number of readers, etc.

A mail newsletter is key for many type of products, today. It's current, is even more important than a bunch of social media. Now, for books, I have no idea (as most things writing related, am pretty new...)

There's a lot of literature on inet about what to take care of to avoid that filtering, but my advice is go with one of those companies. We'd rarely have any bounced / bad stats at all, mails would reach great all machines... Of course, my boss was an expert in marketing, and I was quite knowing my stuff (hehe) , she knew a lot of this things to avoid, so, she would always prefer to use one of those services, pay the money as it'd worth it.

[David VanDyke]

45% opened is pretty good. If you've gotten it to that level, that's not bad.

[Maggie Ann]

45% opened is pretty good. If you've gotten it to that level, that's not bad.

That's about what I get and I use MailChimp. It doesn't hurt to send out a follow-up mailing a few days later just to those who didn't open.

I stopped doing a mailing list because I really hadn't written anything in three years except a cookbook. I sent out a final mail that they wouldn't be hearing from me until I actually had a new release. By the time I do that, the 45% or so that did open will probably look at it and say, "Who?"

[mike herman]

45% opened is pretty good. If you've gotten it to that level, that's not bad.

That is tragic. What you are saying is that there is no way to combat having internet servers block emails that people have voluntarily given and then voluntarily said yes, I am sure I want to give this email address and hear from the author. And there is no way to prevent emails that aren't blocked by the provider from going straight to the persons junk folder, never to be opened.
I realize that getting through spam settings is daunting. At an office I worked at, we had client emails, sent to us by the client, end up in our junk folders. It was ITs job to fix each individual instance of that when it was caught by us. They actively added that email to a list that our servers would allow through.
I wonder if it isn't worth it to round up all the email addresses that have never made it through to the people and use a different provider for them to see if that provider can get through.

[GFXJames]

Maybe I am not understanding everything fully, but are we making a difference between the mails blocked, physically, not by user's action (deleted by the server or moved to some lost server spam folder, or blocked locally by the email client software/webmail rules) , and mail just not opened ? Because that would be an interesting statistic. In many cases, I am not sure how one could know about it, other than with receipt of confirmation, sth that is a complete no-no in newsletters (but fine in a mail from your boss). I mean... I have said yes to receive a bunch of newsletters, I subscribed having total intention of reading those, but some after 2 reads, discovered they wouldn't bring really interesting info for me, others, simply my interest disappeared early due to prefer another subscription or whatever. I think I might be receiving like 10 or so newsletters, but I only open two, and not every time.... ( all of them are unrelated to writers, or books, mine are mostly about technology and art).

[mike herman]

Maybe I am not understanding everything fully, but are we making a difference between the mails blocked, physically, not by user's action (deleted by the server or moved to some lost server spam folder, or blocked locally by the email client software/webmail rules) , and mail just not opened ? Because that would be an interesting statistic. In many cases, I am not sure how one could know about it, other than with receipt of confirmation, sth that is a complete no-no in newsletters (but fine in a mail from your boss). I mean... I have said yes to receive a bunch of newsletters, I subscribed having total intention of reading those, but some after 2 reads, discovered they wouldn't bring really interesting info for me, others, simply my interest disappeared early due to prefer another subscription or whatever. I think I might be receiving like 10 or so newsletters, but I only open two, and not every time....

I am talking about emails blocked by the provider or emails that go straight to a spam folder. My test email address showed me that the email went straight to a junk folder the first time. Then, every time after, it was blocked from being received by the internet provider spam software.

[Bill Hiatt]

45% opened is pretty good. If you've gotten it to that level, that's not bad.

That is tragic. What you are saying is that there is no way to combat having internet servers block emails that people have voluntarily given and then voluntarily said yes, I am sure I want to give this email address and hear from the author. And there is no way to prevent emails that aren't blocked by the provider from going straight to the persons junk folder, never to be opened.
I realize that getting through spam settings is daunting. At an office I worked at, we had client emails, sent to us by the client, end up in our junk folders. It was ITs job to fix each individual instance of that when it was caught by us. They actively added that email to a list that our servers would allow through.
I wonder if it isn't worth it to round up all the email addresses that have never made it through to the people and use a different provider for them to see if that provider can get through.

I think what David is saying is that 45% is a high open rate, period. Mailchimp cites industry-averages in publishing that are much lower than that. You're assuming because of your test results that the reason many people aren't opening the emails is that they aren't seeing them or they aren't getting them at all. That's certainly possible, though I've never seen anything like the results you got from your test. More likely is that most of them just aren't opening the email. The average person opens only a tiny percentage of their commercial emails, many of which come from lists they signed up for.

It's also worth noting that, depending on the recipient's email client, a person may open the email, but that data doesn't get sent back to your service provider's server, so it shows as not being opened even though it was.

[mike herman]

45% opened is pretty good. If you've gotten it to that level, that's not bad.

That is tragic. What you are saying is that there is no way to combat having internet servers block emails that people have voluntarily given and then voluntarily said yes, I am sure I want to give this email address and hear from the author. And there is no way to prevent emails that aren't blocked by the provider from going straight to the persons junk folder, never to be opened.
I realize that getting through spam settings is daunting. At an office I worked at, we had client emails, sent to us by the client, end up in our junk folders. It was ITs job to fix each individual instance of that when it was caught by us. They actively added that email to a list that our servers would allow through.
I wonder if it isn't worth it to round up all the email addresses that have never made it through to the people and use a different provider for them to see if that provider can get through.

I think what David is saying is that 45% is a high open rate, period. Mailchimp cites industry-averages in publishing that are much lower than that. You're assuming because of your test results that the reason many people aren't opening the emails is that they aren't seeing them or they aren't getting them at all. That's certainly possible, though I've never seen anything like the results you got from your test. More likely is that most of them just aren't opening the email. The average person opens only a tiny percentage of their commercial emails, many of which come from lists they signed up for.

It's also worth noting that, depending on the recipient's email client, a person may open the email, but that data doesn't get sent back to your service provider's server, so it shows as not being opened even though it was.

The problem here is that no one knows whether they aren't opening them OR whether they are simply being blocked by the provider OR if they are not passing back the info that "they have been opened". What I do know from my test is that emails are going straight to the junk folder and emails are being blocked by the provider. That is observed and verified.
Everything else I hear is people simply passing along guesswork. If someone were to set up a test of say, 10 or 20 emails that they can track to those computers and see the results, then I would believe that first hand account.
Mailchimp's industry average sounds like a simple statement of the fact that (for whatever reason) peoples emails aren't being recorded as getting opened. It does nothing to clarify the problem. All it says is that, for a variety of reasons, this is what our data shows.
That is not helpful for someone like me who really cares about the "why".
Finally, what about the email addresses that show they have never ever been opened AND have never ever clicked. Delete them? Seems like they are just dead air.

[Writer]

It's frustrating when emails don't land in inboxes, to be sure. But most of us accept it as something we can't do anything about and rely on a combination of continuing to grow our lists and/or pruning inactive subscribers to make up for the ones who don't open for whatever reason. It's a numbers game. About all we can do is study up on it, learn what subject lines and practices are most likely to get us sorted into spam, remind new subscribers to add us to their contacts list, and run re-engagement campaigns to separate the subs who aren't getting the emails from the ones who are getting them and just aren't interested.

All in all, I consider 30-50 % opens a win, if the list is an old one.

[Bill Hiatt]

The problem here is that no one knows whether they aren't opening them OR whether they are simply being blocked by the provider OR if they are not passing back the info that "they have been opened". What I do know from my test is that emails are going straight to the junk folder and emails are being blocked by the provider. That is observed and verified.
Everything else I hear is people simply passing along guesswork. If someone were to set up a test of say, 10 or 20 emails that they can track to those computers and see the results, then I would believe that first hand account.
Mailchimp's industry average sounds like a simple statement of the fact that (for whatever reason) peoples emails aren't being recorded as getting opened. It does nothing to clarify the problem. All it says is that, for a variety of reasons, this is what our data shows.
That is not helpful for someone like me who really cares about the "why".
Finally, what about the email addresses that show they have never ever been opened AND have never ever clicked. Delete them? Seems like they are just dead air.

It is certainly true that no one can with certainty know what is happening with every single email that gets sent. Nor is there any way to know the spam settings on the recipients' computers. Some of them may inadvertently be set way too high. I had to tweak mine down considerably to avoid missing emails I actually wanted to get. In other words, the problem you're identifying is probably by nature insoluble.

While I respect your desire to get hard data, I'll point out that your own test didn't exactly provide you with a mountain of data. A few emails to one test address may demonstrate that the Outlook settings on the computer are too stringent and/or that your provider is too stringent, but it doesn't provide much support for your relatively pessimistic assessment. In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a "Don't fret over what you can't control" kind of person. I try not to stress over things I can't fix--or in this case, can't even verified.

All of that said, there are some variables that can be controlled. Are you using an email address from your website domain to send your newsletter emails? Using a standard address from one of the free providers is a known way to get caught in the spam filters. Some time ago, Mailchimp started refusing to send emails from common providers like AOL, Gmail, Yahoo, etc. For example, instead of sending from billhiatt@aol.com, I was asked to send from billhiatt@billhiatt.com. For people who don't have a business email domain, Mailchimp creates one for them for purposes of sending Mailchimp emails.

I will throw into the mix a tiny amount of data. I've sent test emails from my Mailchimp campaigns to several of my email addresses with different providers. They always come through. That doesn't mean individuals won't accidentally cut them off with overly stringent email client controls, but it does suggest a lot of providers aren't arbitrarily blocking them, which I think was your biggest concern.

As far as the question of what to do with people who never open, I wouldn't worry about them unless they are pushing you into a different fee level with your list provider. In that case, I would recommend sending an email to those people asking them whether or not they are still interested. Some people have done this and surprisingly gotten responses from some people that they want to stay on the list, so it pays to check. (That's an indicator of people who are opening and maybe clicking, but whose email client isn't returning data.) For the ones who don't respond, you can delete them from the list if you want.

Otherwise, 45% open rate is good. Take a victory lap and forget about it. Honestly, you'd be shocked to discover that most indies have a response rate lower than that. My highest ever was 42. My average is about 34. I know people with far lower rates.

[RappaDizzy]

Have you considered words in your message headline or body that could trigger spam filtering? I know how difficult it can be to avoid words like sale, limited time offer or other words used by spam artists. Do a search on it and you will be amazed at the number of words that might trigger a filter.

Another problem that can contribute to a lower open rate/spam problem is sending HTML only. No text version available can be one of the spam triggers as well. Mailchimp has a page where you can convert your HTML to text to send as well as HTML. On one of my computers I don’t allow it to open an HTML version in the window. I have seen a lot of big companies sending what I only see as a blank message. Unless I click to open up the message and go to the HTML version they don’t see me as someone who has opened their message.

[mike herman]

My emails are sent out as from me@my domain name. This latest email is to a brand new group not added to my main group. It is just under 400 emails and at 20hrs old now has a 52% open rate. Great by some peoples standards but not mine since these people are recent. The email was pure text with only a single link for them to click, if they so desired. The heading of the email identified where they had signed up and what they had signed up for. The email contained the link that would take them to their reward. There was no sales. It was merely a response email.
As for language I may have inadvertently used, I've been working hard to avoid that sort of thing. Maybe I should work harder.
I like the idea of singling out the "never been opened and clicked" and making them into a group that I do an individualized email to. I'm not sure what that will do my statistics if virtually all of them are ignored but it will tell me what to do with them.

[Anarchist]

I didn't read the entire thread because... too many words.

Here's my perspective as an email marketer:

1. fortunes are made on a 45% open rate.

2. it's a waste of time to combat overly-aggressive spam filters.

3. I'm happy as long as my emails get through on Gmail and the iphone. The rest, Outlook, Yahoo, etc., is piddly stuff.

[mike herman]

I didn't read the entire thread because... too many words.

Here's my perspective as an email marketer:

1. fortunes are made on a 45% open rate.

2. it's a waste of time to combat overly-aggressive spam filters.

3. I'm happy as long as my emails get through on Gmail and the iphone. The rest, Outlook, Yahoo, etc., is piddly stuff.

LOL. You and pretty much the rest of the industry.
But not me.

[Anarchist]

I didn't read the entire thread because... too many words.

Here's my perspective as an email marketer:

1. fortunes are made on a 45% open rate.

2. it's a waste of time to combat overly-aggressive spam filters.

3. I'm happy as long as my emails get through on Gmail and the iphone. The rest, Outlook, Yahoo, etc., is piddly stuff.

LOL. You and pretty much the rest of the industry.
But not me.

Ya gotta do what works for you, man.

[mike herman]

I didn't read the entire thread because... too many words.

Here's my perspective as an email marketer:

1. fortunes are made on a 45% open rate.

2. it's a waste of time to combat overly-aggressive spam filters.

3. I'm happy as long as my emails get through on Gmail and the iphone. The rest, Outlook, Yahoo, etc., is piddly stuff.

LOL. You and pretty much the rest of the industry.
But not me.

Ya gotta do what works for you, man.

Heh, thanks.

[David VanDyke]

Summary:

You have a 45% open rate, which is very good.

You have no idea why the other 55% individually do not open, and you've done everything you could to make sure they don't get filtered. There's no way to even tell if those 55% are the same 55% all the time.

Most of the time this is just a numbers game. Be happy if your numbers are good--I'd say above 25% is good--and focus on more productive parts of your indie life.

[mike herman]

Summary:

You have a 45% open rate, which is very good.

You have no idea why the other 55% individually do not open, and you've done everything you could to make sure they don't get filtered. There's no way to even tell if those 55% are the same 55% all the time.

Most of the time this is just a numbers game. Be happy if your numbers are good--I'd say above 25% is good--and focus on more productive parts of your indie life.

Thanks for the advice. I'm currently spending most of my time promoting or setting up the promotion for 4 just released books. The emails are just part of that. Only when everything comes together and they actually sell will I be happy but I appreciate the sentiment.
Maybe when I hit an open rate of 75% I'll be happy. Until then, its just another marketing hurdle to jump.

[OfficialEthanJ]

I think you're fixating on one metric at the expense of others, namely:

• Engagement
• Conversion

As someone with a 50% average open rate (oooh!), that means diddly to me if nobody is engaging with *what* they're opening, or converting after engaging. I get your concern that if your message routes directly to spam/trash, nobody has a fair shot at engaging/converting. Perhaps adding something to your communications package asking your potential subscribers to whitelist you or similar might give you more visibility in the inbox, but again, that's not an end unto itself.

Sample whitelist request:

Gmail and other public mail services actively block forum emails,
and dont tell you they are doing it.               
Check your spam folder. Check your quota isn't at the limit.
Contact them to get the block removed.

[Cathleen]

Actually, with gmail my newsletters end up in the promotions folder. If you drag and drop an email from the promotions tab to your inbox, all future communications should end up there. For other email providers, you might need to check spam folders, but drag-and-drop usually works.

I mention this because gmail is the provider most of my subscribers use, and these are pretty much the instructions I give people. If you're going to give one generic set, it might be best to tailor it so it will help the most folks.

Nobody has ever sent fan mail concerning my whitelisting instructions, though, so it's all a guess.

[mike herman]

Actually, with gmail my newsletters end up in the promotions folder. If you drag and drop an email from the promotions tab to your inbox, all future communications should end up there. For other email providers, you might need to check spam folders, but drag-and-drop usually works.

I mention this because gmail is the provider most of my subscribers use, and these are pretty much the instructions I give people. If you're going to give one generic set, it might be best to tailor it so it will help the most folks.

Nobody has ever sent fan mail concerning my whitelisting instructions, though, so it's all a guess.

Giving people who never see the email instructions on how they can see the email seems like a catch 22. If they never see the email, they can't follow instructions they never see.
And as to the comment about focusing on just getting the emails seen instead of focusing on conversions, If someone never sees the email, there obviously is never going to be a conversion. Visibility is the first step in conversions. If there is no visibility, it doesn't matter what one says in the email.
By the way, the campaign I complained about, is now up to 59% opened rate after 3 days.

[Cathleen]

I've been sending a private email with whitelisting instructions from my gmail account, although I'm trying to think of a workaround for that since it's labor-intensive.

[mike herman]

I've been sending a private email with whitelisting instructions from my gmail account, although I'm trying to think of a workaround for that since it's labor-intensive.

Not sure if this will help or you may already know this. https://www.techwalla.com/articles/how-to-send-mass-emails-with-gmail

[Cathleen]

Thanks, but I've been sending emails individually, as people subscribe. I've been thinking about the form subscribers get from Mailerlite, the thank you message after you've subscribed. I've been wondering about personalizing that with whitelisting stuff. Something to go check out today.

[mike herman]

Thanks, but I've been sending emails individually, as people subscribe. I've been thinking about the form subscribers get from Mailerlite, the thank you message after you've subscribed. I've been wondering about personalizing that with whitelisting stuff. Something to go check out today.

I'd be interested in what you come up with.

[LilyBLily]

I understand the OP's concern. I just got a 35% open rate on a first mass email to a batch of new subscribers from a giveaway list. This is very good for an email from a total stranger. I'm not careful at all about my headline copy, so many of my newsletters probably fall into people's spam folders. I see percentages ranging in the teens and twenties for notices about sales and discounts, for instance. In the OP's case, a carefully worded email that only got a 45% open rate is not good enough. 

But as others have said several times over, we are not in control of somebody else's spam settings, or the spam settings of some big email provider such as gmail.

Putting whitelist instructions in our come-ons to get people to join our mailing lists would deter them from signing up. Perhaps a welcome/double opt-in automation could give the whitelisting details. If the request for whitelist comes before the free item you're sending them (hmm...not sure if that's GDPR approved), they'd do it. Just a thought. Otherwise, my best advice echoes the others': chill. 

[mike herman]

I understand the OP's concern. I just got a 35% open rate on a first mass email to a batch of new subscribers from a giveaway list. This is very good for an email from a total stranger. I'm not careful at all about my headline copy, so many of my newsletters probably fall into people's spam folders. I see percentages ranging in the teens and twenties for notices about sales and discounts, for instance. In the OP's case, a carefully worded email that only got a 45% open rate is not good enough. 

But as others have said several times over, we are not in control of somebody else's spam settings, or the spam settings of some big email provider such as gmail.

Putting whitelist instructions in our come-ons to get people to join our mailing lists would deter them from signing up. Perhaps a welcome/double opt-in automation could give the whitelisting details. If the request for whitelist comes before the free item you're sending them (hmm...not sure if that's GDPR approved), they'd do it. Just a thought. Otherwise, my best advice echoes the others': chill.

After 3 days, the open rate on that email is 59%.

[Cathleen]

So, in Mailerlite, what you can do is to customize your success page--that's the page readers see right after they click on your landing page. Here's a screenshot of mine with the arrow:



and the link in case that doesn't work: https://cathleentownsend.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/mailerlite-tutorial-on-landing-page.png.

Anyway, you click on the success page and you get to compose your initial welcome message. Mine now says:

Welcome!

You'll be receiving a confirmation email very soon. If you have gmail, it will be sent to your promotions folder. If you want to receive future messages in your primary inbox, you'll need to drag and drop the confirmation email there.

It may also be necessary to educate other email providers that my missives aren't spam. Usually, drag and drop will work--there's always some method of informing your provider that this message is something you want to read. I apologize for the extra bother, but spam filters are something that's completely beyond my control.

I look forward to chatting with you. Feel free to reply to any email I send.

[mike herman]

So, in Mailerlite, what you can do is to customize your success page--that's the page readers see right after they click on your landing page. Here's a screenshot of mine with the arrow:



and the link in case that doesn't work: https://cathleentownsend.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/mailerlite-tutorial-on-landing-page.png.

Anyway, you click on the success page and you get to compose your initial welcome message. Mine now says:

Welcome!

You'll be receiving a confirmation email very soon. If you have gmail, it will be sent to your promotions folder. If you want to receive future messages in your primary inbox, you'll need to drag and drop the confirmation email there.

It may also be necessary to educate other email providers that my missives aren't spam. Usually, drag and drop will work--there's always some method of informing your provider that this message is something you want to read. I apologize for the extra bother, but spam filters are something that's completely beyond my control.

I look forward to chatting with you. Feel free to reply to any email I send.

I like this. Thanks.