NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Spam
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> Spam
Kevin Leathers (Kevin.Leathers_at_obgyn.net)
Wed, 02 Apr 1997 10:21:32 -0600
George wrote:
>If the spammer paid for his list of
>e-addresses, isn't that the same as a "paid advertiser" on a news list?
>I'm confused.
No George that is not the same. When you sign up for an email service you
get something of value in return. Too much of it or bad content and you will
possibly stop delivery. For the list owner, they have to walk a tight rope,
trying not to piss off the majority of the list with ads, providing valuable
content or conversation and trying to pay bills and make advertisers happy.
A basic email list audience looks something like this:
Don't want ads & Don't want to pay
++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
Want it free & don't mind a certain level of ads
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Will pay for content to avoid ads
++++
++++
Frankly the first group will never be happy, even if you do give it to them
for free, with no ads. The second group, makes up the bulk of the audience,
these people realize that nothing is totally free, and will accept ads up to
a certain point before they start to complain. This is where the provider
must balance content and advertising. The third group, unfortunately, does
not represent most people, if that was the case, everyone would get news and
information from the ONE source that the purchased.
The list model works like TV and many print publications; we accept ads in
lieu of paying the actual cost to present the content or service. Last I
heard, you could buy a box for $200. to $500., plug it in and receive
unlimited use of the TV signals in your area, the exchange of course, is
that the national and regional stations get to sell about 15 minutes of ads
per hour. This model seems to work fairly well for companies like ABC, CBS,
NBC, FOX...
What all the discussion is about, regarding bulk e-mail or spam, is
something that also concerns me if it is allowed to get out of hand. Spam is
generally ads or the equivalent of direct mail sent to unsuspecting
recipients. Typically, these are solicitations that may or may not apply the
recipients needs or wants. Where this type of marketing gets every ones skin
crawling, is the potential for abuse. Unlike any other form of media, there
are very low cost for distribution. Where, in telemarketing and direct mail,
there are limits to how much you can do with a given number of people in a
given amount of time with a given budget. With e-mail it becomes more
automatic, one person can program the mailings to go out almost instantly,
to a very large audience, at virtually no cost to the sender.
My personal notes on the subject:
I don't think that good marketers pose the problem, but more the larger
group of unscrupulous "throw enough ---- against the wall, and some will
stick" types, that bother everyone. The potential for e-mail abuse is much
greater than for any other area of marketing, therefore limits, rules or
ethical standards need to be developed. Could you imagine downloading 100
(or more) junk e-mail messages per day.
Where I have a problem, is that there must be some accepted level of
promotion that could utilize email. If we stop people and companies from
economically exposing all new ideas or products, we may end up the ones that
loose.
--
Kevin Leathers (512) 451-2842 PHONE
Director: PR, Sales & Marketing (512) 377-5626 FAX
OBGYN.net <http://www.obgyn.net> mailto:kevin_at_obgyn.net
Austin, Texas USA 78756
