Thursday, April 21, 2016

E-mail Sender Reputation Key to Reaching Inboxes

Reputation matters in marketing, and e-mail marketers especially need a sterling sender reputation to ensure messages reach target inboxes. Mailbox providers use algorithms to filter and remove "spam," and marketing e-mails can be swept out of inboxes based on their sender reputation metrics, explained a recent Inc. magazine article by Peter Roesler, president of Web Marketing Pros. To show how important sender reputation is to inbox placement, Roesler cited recent Return Path research. The Return Path study measured e-mail marketer reputation with a Sender Score--a number between 0 and 100 (best)--to show how mailbox providers view a marketer's IP address. Return Path found one quarter of e-mail marketers with Sender Scores between 71 and 80 had their messages land in junk/spam folders, for example. Even marketers with scores between 81 and 90 had 10% of their messages diverted to junk/spam folders. Marketers want to be in the 99-100 score range, where only 2% of messages went into junk folders. Unfortunately, most e-mail marketers fall far short in terms of sender reputation; Return Path found 52% of e-mails were sent by marketers with scores below 71. One way to end up with a poor score, Roesler warns, is trying to jump-start e-mail marketing by purchase of an e-mail list with addresses that have not been properly obtained. Many of these e-mail recipients will mark unsolicited content as spam, spoiling reputation so legitimate e-mails get dumped in spam limbo. E-mail marketers need to know how they are viewed by mailbox providers if they want to improve reputation and keep it polished. Since scoring criteria vary by provider--based on combinations of open rates, bounce rates, spam complaints, etc.--it's best to go to an outside source to check reputation metrics, advises Roesler. He suggests resources such as SenderBase.org, ReputationAuthority and TrustedSource. See http://www.inc.com/peter-roesler/why-reputation-matters-for-email-marketing.html

No comments:

Post a Comment