Re: Email list purchases (No! No! No!)

From: Mark J. Welch <MarkWelch_at_MarkWelch.com>
Date: Tue 16 Apr 2002 20:02:04 -0600

Christine Quan wrote:
> I'm trying to incorporate email list acquisition into my online
> marketing strategy, but I'm not familiar in doing that. Does
> anyone know where are the best places to purchase targeted
> email lists? Are there any well known companies out there
> that sells email lists? Also, what's the pluses and minuses of
> using purchased email lists?

Coincidentally, on another list, last Friday, someone else asked:
> My new directive is to research and initiate a plan of action to
> purchase emails (preferably double opt-in) and work out a protocol
> for my staff to run a direct mailing campaign. Anyone know where
> I can look at purchasing a quality list from a quality company?

Here is my reply, and my follow-up reply:

First: There is really no such thing as a "double opt-in" list -- that is
the derogatory term used by folks who believe that "unconfirmed opt-in" is
an acceptable method for building a list. The correct term is "confirmed
opt-in," since the consumer only opts in once, then takes some trivial
action in response to an email to "confirm" that the opt-in was not forged.
(Frequently, when I complain about spam, the spammer turns around and fills
in my email address on a dozen of his competitor's lists, seeking revenge
on me and also seeking to divert my wrath to the competitors. In the past,
spammers have gathered all the email addresses from posts in the
"net-abuse.email" newsgroup and cleverly resold that list as an "opt-in"
list, in order to undermine their competitors. What a business.)

Second: If anyone actually offers to "sell" you a list, it is NOT a
legitimate list. Anyone with a valid "confirmed opt-in" will insist on
doing your mailings for you, so they can insure that the list is used only
according to the permission they obtained. Anyone who sells a list, is
essentially opening up the list for use by anyone, anytime, anywhere, for
any purpose, and we all know that nobody actually "opts in" for this kind
of abuse.

Note that many (many!) companies that claim to manage "opt-in" lists or
even claim to run "confirmed opt-in" or "double opt-in" lists, are simply
lying. In far too many cases, I am told that because someone was on a list
on a particular date and didn't object, they were "presumed to have opted
in." Or Company A buys a list from Company B, which Company B claims was an
opt-in list, but Company A does no "due diligence" to confirm that there
were ever any opt-ins. (Of course, the real sequence is that Company A buys
a list from Company B, which bought the list from Company C, which bought
the list from Company D, etc., on and on to Company Z, which culled the
email addresses from web pages and newsgroups and simply lied about the
source.)

Sadly, my experience is that nearly every "email list" management firm I
have ever encountered has lied or mismanaged their list so that people are
included who never opted in, and often people who have repeatedly sought to
"opt out" are retained. Some firms, started out with an "opt out" list,
then switched to "unconfirmed opt-in" for new additions for a while, and
now claim that the list is "confirmed opt-in" even though many (most)
addresses are carried
over from prior systems.

Third: Postmaster Direct (Netcreations) is the only email-list company that
I have ever found trustworthy -- they have always required a confirmed
opt-in process for their own lists (beware of any lists they are reselling
or fulfilling for others, which could be tainted). When I bought mailings
through PostmasterDirect, I always included my own separate "complaint"
instructions (in addition to the opt-out information that they include in
every emailing), and I never once received a complaint. Alas, the results
were not what I hoped: three separate campaigns returned dismal responses,
never even coming close to an acceptable return on the minimum $1,000
charge (at rates from 15 to 25 cents per address). (Note that two of the
three campaigns sought to recruit webmasters into two quite different
affiliate programs, generating only a few signups and ultimately zero sales.)

Finally: Instead of "acquiring" opt-in lists, I think the better option is
to advertise in "confirmed opt-in" email newsletters, and direct any
responders to a page where they can opt-in to your list. If your goal is to
recruit affiliates, you're generally stuck with one-on-one recruitment,
often using the telephone in addition to email (but never, never, never
send an affiliate recruitment to a site that plainly says it is
"non-commercial" or "no advertising accepted" -- and yes, this means your
staff MUST view each site and never use an auto-bot to gather potential
affiliate data).

Never forget that if your company crosses the line (even "just once"
or "just a little bit" or "by mistake" or "it was a single errant employee
or consultant") your company's server names and IP addresses may be added
to various "blackhole lists." Fighting spam is a "triage" activity -- no
notice, no hearings, just rapid defensive action to try to slow down a
relentless flood of spam -- and thus the damage can never be completely undone.

A personal example: Barnes and Noble culled email addresses from web pages
and sent Unsolicited Commercial Email to promote its newly-launched site in
1996. They weren't even recruiting affiliates, they just started sending
promotional emails to anyone whose email address they could cull. In
response to complaints, B&N said it would continue to send email to anyone
it chose, excluding only individuals who affirmatively "opted out." In
response to this unrepentant spamming, I called for a boycott of
BarnesandNoble.com (aka bn.com). In the intervening six years, B&N has
never apologized nor promised not to use UCE in the future, and thus I
continue to urge a boycott of the company by consumers and affiliates.
Imagine having someone like me annoying you intermittently for six years. ;-)

FOLLOW-UP:

I just noticed an article in the March 25 print edition of DM News that is
relevant. An earlier March 20 online article can be viewed at:
http://www.dmnews.com/cgi-bin/artprevbot.cgi?article_id=19739&dest=article

To summarize: Virtumundo sued two companies (Mindset and Inurv), alleging
that the "opt-in" lists they sold to Virtumundo were not opt-in lists at
all. The result was a ten-fold increase in the number of complaints,
compared to typical opt-in lists used by Virtumundo.

I'm not familiar with the activities of any of these three companies
(though I've certainly seen lots of Virtumundo's "punch-the-monkey"
baners). Although neither defendant company responded for the article, I
assume that both will vigorously dispute the claims made in the lawsuit.





-- Mark J. Welch - Internet Performance Marketing Consultant
-- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ 925-462-8483 Pleasanton, CA






Received on Tue Apr 16 2002 - 21:02:04 CDT