Re: Email Marketing Report
I just wanted to clarify my post from Friday. It appears that
I wasn't as clear as I wanted to be.
John Gaskill wrote:
>If people are ignoring your email (e.g., deleting it
>rather than reading it), making it more interactive
>will not increase its effectiveness.
>After all, a deleted interactive email is just as useless
>as a deleted plain text email. Isn't it?
>Or am I missing something?
When I used the term "interactive" to describe the report's
advice I was trying to say that the report suggests building
a two way relationship with your subscribers. I didn't mean
the email's format. Changing from plain text to something
else is pointless. It's hard to paraphrase 15 odd pages in a
single sentence though Rob Frankel seemed to do a better job
than I did.
Rob Frankel wrote:
>The trick to getting people to
>opening your e-mail is putting something inside that e-mail
>that isn't garbage, especially slow-loading, interactive
>Try putting something that's meaningful to them, not you, in
>there and see just how much better things get in a hurry.
The report doesn't talk about "interactive garbage" it does
talk about creating "meaningful" content for your subscribers.
In hindsight I think that the word interactive was the wrong
word to use. I hope this clears things up.
Received on Mon Jul 15 2002 - 07:40:08 CDT