Dan Spellman’s last blog post..Spreading The Word – Corporate Blogging

Paul

Paul Baranda’s last blog post..Carmindy’s 5-Minute Face

You should send more frequently if your content warrants it and your audience expects it, not otherwise. There are plenty of cases where sending daily makes a lot of sense (e.g., daily prayers, news summaries, daily ski slope conditions, school homework notices, coupon aggregation sites). Recipients in these cases look forward to the messages each day.

- Raj Khera, CEO, MailerMailer

Maybe the email doesn’t bounce, but I stop listening very quickly. The senders of those emails have lost my trust and are unlikely to ever sell me anything.

Maybe I’m a data point that doesn’t fit with the rest of the data points. I can only tell you how I view the daily emails.

Steven Bradley’s last blog post..How Does $25,000 In Prizes Sound?

Thanks for the post. Useful thoughts. Some points to make.

First, email is much more established than Web 2.0 as marketing medium. Therefore it is much too early to say one is more effective than the other.

True, with limited resources, managers may be better advised to stick to the tried and true.

Companies don’t want to be left behind, so the risk of investing resources in emerging technology might be less than the potential cost of not investing. That’s the call that managers have to make.

Whether or not building a Twitter following or creating fan clubs is more “exhilarating” than building an email campaign is a matter of opinion! I quite enjoy putting together HTML emails to run through MailChimp and then following the results.

The bottom line is to use robust metrics to track campaign effectiveness. You don’t mention conversions for example.

I’d generally agree with your points 1 through 3.

Point 4 is self-evident but misplaced. Of course more links will result in more clicks. It is clicks per link that is the important measures.

I am not sure about point 5. A more frequent emailer may have a more up to date mailing list, simply because recipients are updating their info more often. The frequency of emails is just one factor that contributes to bounce rates.

Here’s a good summary discussion on Web 2.0 versus email.

http://www.businessweek.com/debateroom/archives/2007/10/e-mail_faces_d e.html

Roger’s last blog post..Friends for Sale?

Seologia’s last blog post..Google no es tonto, vos sí

Spam is an irritation, and granted loads of mails never even get opened, but the tips outlined here will definitely enhance the presentation of your email message. This will greatly increase your chances of success.

If anything, people who use email to communicate will have to adopt to the new ways email is being consumed. But from what our data shows, email continues to be a very effective way to reach many markets.

Karen Swim’s last blog post..P is for Purpose

As I said in my previous comment, 1.) there is junk in email and there is tons of junk in Twitter. I’m sorry, I get so close to taking half the people in my Twitter feed off because they don’t know when to stop with every inane detail and/or plug. Good content is good content. Period. If it’s in an email and it’s good, I’ll read it. 2.) the vast majority of people still use email as their primary means for communications with other people online. Send them an email ABOUT social media, if that’s what you are passionate about. Just make sure it doesn’t suck.

Michelle Greer’s last blog post..Drink Beer, Buy Professional Photography Prints, Deliver a Beatdown to Cancer. Done.

Maybe there’s a new opportunity in email. While others are focusing on social media, a smart email marketer can play in an empty playground.

I’m not suggesting that email campaigns are ineffective (although, I personally despise them). But haven’t they plateaued? Many of us are excited about social media because we see them as new ways to interact with clients and customers.

But I still stand on that it’s going to be a mashup of three methods for online marketing to be successful; video, blog/social network and a message(a tweet or email)

Wayne Sutton’s last blog post..How to embrace social media in the newsroom with Kara Andrade

Avenues like twitter and ning can help to drive brand loyalty and interesting buzz, but they only reach a certain (small) percentage of potential and existing customers. Never forget that there is a specific market that social media attracts. Being excited about it is one thing (wayne!) but don’t forget that it has a limited appeal.

Mediums like twitter have other short comings aside from appeal. They also have a limit on bandwidth. I can’t always convey value in 140 characters, sometimes images, convincing testimonies, or other avenues such as interactive flash will go further than a microburst of text.

One quick note is that I think that “sending more” point in the article is somewhat dubious. If you send beyond what you have real valuable content for you will only generate more complaints. Sending just to have volume is a bad idea.

Adam Covati’s last blog post..Email Marketing Is One of The Best Marketing Programs for Retailers

McDawg’s last blog post..‘Open Access Week’: Some Posts from the Blogosphere