Marketing’s Weekly Dose of the Truth

Ken Magill

About Us

Sure, Email More; But Not Your Whole File: Experts

4/30/13

By Ken Magill

Not all email addresses are created equal.

As a result, while some experts don’t necessarily disagree with the concept of sending email more frequently if it results in a revenue lift, they do not recommend sending more frequently to every address on the house file.

As some readers will recall, I have been advocating for testing increased email frequency for two weeks.

As follow up, I interviewed two experts who offer a different take.

[Author’s note: Both experts quoted in this piece have a vested interest in the email marketing strategy they espouse. One represents my lead advertiser. No one needs to point this out for me.]

“We’re of the opinion that treating everybody the same with frequency is not the right approach,” said Forest Bronzan, CEO of email marketing strategy-management firm Email Aptitude. “We can radically increase frequency by orders of magnitude if it’s for that right group based on their engagement and we’ll make a lot more money. And what we’re seeing is by decreasing frequency to people who aren’t that engaged, we’re making more money that way, too.

“We’re hitting them four times a week and then suddenly we’re hitting them once a week or maybe once every couple weeks and it’s fresh, it’s new, they’re not as saturated and they’re engaging more,” Bronzan added.

To determine which addresses should get more frequency and which should get less, Email Aptitude’s technology looks at historic engagement metrics, such as opens, clicks and recency on a rolling basis.

“Someone might be in track “a” one week and they’re engaging less and they’re going to drop to track “b” [and get fewer emails],” Bronzan said. Likewise “someone might be in track “c” and receiving a few emails and then they start engaging more and more and they’ll upshift to a higher-cadence track.”

Email Aptitude applied this philosophy to men’s clothing retailer Bonobos’ email strategy and was able to increase frequency to highly engaged subscribers by two to three times, according to Bronzan. What is more, the approach decreased Bonobos’s list attrition by 84 percent, he said.

“We increased revenue for that high group … and then what we saw with some of the lower groups when we decreased it to one a week, they started to wake up a little bit,” Bronzan said. “These were folks that previously were not that engaged. They were maybe opening one email a month. Now they’re opening four emails a month and actually converting.”

In an email exchange with the Magill Report, Michael Iarrobino, product manager for FreshAddress, wrote: “[Y]ou want to increase frequency for customers where it makes sense, and it probably doesn’t take a lot of whizbangery. Look at your own data and bump it up for recent openers, and see where the clicks and revenue go. Your skittish marketer likely feels comfortable starting to test here.”

He continued: “In addition to your own high frequency/recent engagers you’d ideally want to also get those folks who do, in fact, engage and are engaging all the time with different brands, but maybe just not with you,” Iarrobino wrote. “For these folks maybe you just need to bump up the frequency to either (a) get them to start engaging with your brand or (b) get them to state definitively that you’re wasting your time trying to get them to engage.

“Then there are the folks who just aren’t engaging, anywhere. Or maybe they engage, but never at the email address your store clerk got from them when they were really annoyed and having a bad day and just wanting to get the heck out of the store,” he wrote. “Maybe you’ll get something going with these guys if you increase frequency, but I don’t blame the skittish marketer for not wanting to start here, because then the engagement metrics really do take a dip and you totally expected them to from the outset. Also, it’s likely not immediately obvious to the marketer who these guys are vs. the previous group that really can take it and perform.”

FreshAddress’s eSpend Score product segments clients’ lists according to the tactic Iarrobino outlined above.

Comments

Show: Newest | Oldest

Post a Comment
Your Name:
Subject:
Comments:
Verification:
Please type the letters in the image above

Terms: Feel free to be as big a jerk as you want, but don't attack anyone other than me personally. And don't criticize people or companies other than me anonymously. Got something crappy to say? Say it under your real name. Anonymous potshots and personal attacks aimed at me, however, are fine.

Posted by: Dela
Date: 2013-05-03 05:49:24
Subject: This is lazy thinking and somewhat disingenuous

Ken - Neither I nor your original article have ever recommended sending everyone on the list exactly the same message to everyone on the list exactly the same number of times every month. That would just be stupid! What anyone who actually has to take responsibility for making their numbers knows is that if you send any given segment more email you will make more money and if you send them less you will make less money. So if you have 2 segments an active segment that you send 2 emails per week to and a less active segment you send 1 email a month you will make more money from BOTH groups if you increase the frequency of the actives to 3 a week and the inactives to 2 a month. The problem is it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work that out and stating the obvious doesn’t sell software or strategy. However the process of sending more email without compromising quality does however require a lot more resource. And to declare my interest, what Alchemy Worx does is provide highly skilled strategic, operational and analytical email marketing resources to our clients, enabling them to send every segment BETTER campaigns more often.

Xverify