Very low open rate?

[eMonetize]

Since the list was cleaned and bounces removed, that removes that potential issue.

Older data does not perform the same as fresh. With older data 5000 is nothing and you want substantially bigger amounts to test. .

If it is fresh and targeted to mortgage, it should perform much better. You can't be mixing fresh data with aged data, you need to test separately.

Here is the thing, when you have fresh/targeted data, users are far more receptive to opening, because your hitting them with what they are seeking and when they are seeking it.

With fresh targeted data, I prefer to use autoresponders that use shared IPs, because you can piggyback off the IP reputation of all the users.

However, with aged data that's not the case, you get far less opens. So you have to send much higher volume to make up for it. It is also more prone to getting complaints, so using autoresponders is not wise with new data, plus it's too costly as you won't get the response needed to make it worthwhile. To get the best possible deliverability, you really want to break the data up by domain and in some cases domain groups (TLDs, Cables, GI and/or Pure GI) and test your IPs to make sure you can deliver it. You also need to know how to send send it. How you mail to AOL, is different than GI if you want to send volume. Lastly there will be domains that without good IP reputation, you just won't be able to inbox and with purchased data, you will not be able to build the reputation needed. In addition you are going to need to change your IPs out from time to time, so you need to work with providers that can do this and make sure your getting IPs that aren't blocked/ blacklisted and the domains you are using are good.

Also, keep in mind that it's all about collecting your opens/clickers and then moving them up the sending platform chain or use to build your IP reputation.

So what was your problem...test your IPs and check for blacklistings and check your domains. I'm still betting on delivery problems.

Last word, services that provide you with small amounts of IPs and say you can send volume and use purchased lists are usually worthless. If you have IPs from a block and other mailers have IPs from the same block, if any of them get their IPs blocked, it is likely to get the entire block of IPs blocked. Also when they say you can send volume, they aren't saying you can inbox volume and then when you ask about it, then it all comes down to the quality of your lists. It's all BS to scam the novice mailer.

 

[Ivana Adnium]

How are you sending the data? different software and different mail servers.
How old is it? from 1 year up to only 1 week
Is it targeted? 3 sendouts were not targeted, the last (from today) is.

By any chance...
Do you know the breakdown of the domains in the list? list has been cleaned for bounces
Are you seeding to check deliverability? no
Did you have it cleaned by an email hygiene company? yes, list cleaning service.

What was your entire subject line?
"I tried to reach you (remortgage offer)"

Do you know what is required for mail to be can-spam compliant?
Yes, I read the can spam act compliance guide again and again and do everything from optin, opt out, suppression lists, clear message, etc.

However, I don't think any of these things could be a reason for such a marginal open rate. It's too marginal.

The message itself is in html, well structurd with links and pictures.

My gut says
- very bad optin lists or
- whole ip range of mail server is blacklisted?
- target url in the message is blacklisted

These are the things that come most likely into question.
"most likely", but for me these 3 things are also unlikely and make no sense.

You seem to have lots of knowledge alreadt regarding e-mail lists and...why not try to build your own e-mail lists through landing pages/popups/newsletter campaigns etc? I think you'd hav much more luck that way

 

[T J Tutor]

Whoever you talked to was wrong. Trust me, I do this for a living!

CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Full text:
LegalArchiver.Org: Can-Spam Act 2003

You can read the entire law and nowhere does it state that data must have permission or opt-in. It however, does not allow scraped data.

It even states: when sending unsolicited commercial emails, it must be stated that the email is an advertisement or a marketing solicitation. So the law is actually providing permission to spam, as long as you follow the rules.

So by acquiring data where the users have given permission to receive 3rd party message is 100% fine, but you still need to follow the law and be compliant, as the users didn't subscribe directly.

Thanks, but I have had the hard copy since 2003. I mean you no disrespect, but you are saying this quote I made above in post #12 is wrong and false, "If the affiliate also advertises its own services or products, it is also a sender under the CAN-SPAM Act and the rules concerning multiple senders apply (see Multiple Senders).", it is taken straight from the FTC CanSpam online doc. It's a copy & paste. It's the area that affiliates most often over look. I know you simply are missing the points. For one, the people I spoke to were the FTC on the phone in my attorneys office. They explicitly told us that affiliates using purchased lists and selling their own products are subject to being treated as an original sender. They went on to tell us that it is the number one most overlooked and abused area of the 2003 act. Many misinterpret the intention of this statement and it is the number one reason autoresponder services have banned the use of purchased lists along with their IP's becoming blacklisted.

I am certain you know far more than I with regards to emailing with purchased lists, however, I am quoting the FTC's position regarding affiliates, not product owners that have written agreements with 3rd party product owners. Here is the litmus test and the companies you can call to confirm. You see, the above quotes are the very reason that if you use, or attempt to use, a purchased list with any of the current autoresponder services, they will ban you. They won't accept it because affiliate violations are rampant in the industry with purchased lists and the disputed meaning of the above quote in the CAN-SPAM ACT. In addition, in 2010, due to this misinterpretation of the law and the disputes surrounding it, Canada restructured their version to clear it up with their new CASL legislation which clearly states "no use of purchased email lists are lawful for personal or business purposes".

What is happening between you and I in this discussion is the same as the disputes the FTC has with the companies that interpret the law as you do. The FTC won't act on it because they have ask the courts to clarify it and the courts won't clarify it because they say it is ambiguous. This caused the U.S. courts to require the house to re-legislate it and it has been hung up there now since 2009, according to the FTC. It was at this point in 2009 when Canada decided to restructure their statutes and passed the CASL legislation in 2010 that caused all autoresponder services to stop allowing the use of purchased lists because they violated Canadian law. The autoresponder industry took that to mean the U.S. would follow suit with re-legislation to clarify the meaning of the CAN-SPAM statement, "If the affiliate also advertises its own services or products, it is also a sender under the CAN-SPAM Act and the rules concerning multiple senders apply (see Multiple Senders)."

You are interpreting it as your part of the industry wants to interpret it. I am interpreting it as my attorney, the FTC, and the autorepsonder industry interprets it. Until the house in the U.S. re-legislates it, I accept that you won't be challenged. However, I highly recommend you avoid Canada, they will serve you warrants here in the U.S. due to our joint extradition laws.

I know you are far more practiced with mass mailing purchased lists than I, however, I am simply relating that there are businesses, people, and courts in the U.S. that don't interpret the technicality of the law in the same fashion as yourself.

If you doubt there is a dispute, here is iContacts own interpretation. They agree that the properly interpreted law for affiliates is different than your own.

"At iContact, we have never allowed our users to send emails via our system to purchased or otherwise dubiously acquired lists. An outsider looking in might be surprised by how many resources we commit to weeding out unscrupulous senders from our system. These are paying customers, and you might think it would be too easy to turn a blind eye to their activities and take their cash. However, in the long run this would severely damage our reputation and potentially have a negative impact on the tens of thousands of honest clients we serve.

But if you are looking for another reason not to used purchased lists – try this for size:

THEY DO NOT WORK!

Email marketing’s success is largely based on the permission subscribers have given you to contact them. This is why email marketing remains the most cost-effective method for driving repeat business to your organization. When you purchase a list, no matter what the vendor tells you, you do not have a relationship with the names on that list, and therefore have no permission to contact them. In short, a purchased list is as good as spam."

You and I are never going to come together on this, but everything I have quoted and credited is from both the FTC, CASL, and autoresponder company interpretations of the laws. I am simply believing them and operating my businesses as they require.

I know you will continue to dispute me, and that's okay, but I am quoting the governments, the businesses, and my own personal discussion with the FTC in 2014. I wish you great success.

 

[eMonetize]

Interesting, I will look into your story.

But yea, I will dispute you still.

Yes, I know about Canada and I don't mail to Canada addresses.

I use autoresponders all the time to mail purchased lists. Done right, the services can not tell the difference between a purchased lists and an opt-in lists. In the end, if your not causing them problems, you can mail.

 

[MxyzptlkFishStix]

@T J Tutor

Actually, @eMonetize is correct. Sending to purchased list as a third party is granted by CAN-SPAM if affirmative consent was granted to the original party that your email can be transferred to a third party. Scraped/harvested gets you fines and possibly jail time. It's why Spamhaus calls CAN-SPAM the "YOU-CAN-SPAM" Act.

There's no opt-in mandate in the CAN-SPAM Act. How do I know? I won a $500 dollar bet from an associate watching that provision being tossed out in a televised hearing of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee on CSPAN. John Ensign, yeah, that John Ensign, fought to get that provision removed with support from Bryon Dorgan and Bill Nelson.

 

[eMonetize]

Thanks for pointing that out. I knew there was something that made 3rd party OK, it's just been so long and I wasn't in the mood to read the entire thing.

 

[T J Tutor]

@T J Tutor

Actually, @eMonetize is correct. Sending to purchased list as a third party is granted by CAN-SPAM if affirmative consent was granted to the original party that your email can be transferred to a third party. Scraped/harvested gets you fines and possibly jail time. It's why Spamhaus calls CAN-SPAM the "YOU-CAN-SPAM" Act.

There's no opt-in mandate in the CAN-SPAM Act. How do I know? I won a $500 dollar bet from an associate watching that provision being tossed out in a televised hearing of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee on CSPAN. John Ensign, yeah, that John Ensign, fought to get that provision removed with support from Bryon Dorgan and Bill Nelson.

I have always agreed that he is correct about sending as a third party. I never challenged that.
I said, "accept when being introduced by another through their list", (a 3rd party). I am not in disagreement with the right to email as a third party.

Where we are disagreeing is the interpretation of the statement in the law that states, "If the affiliate also advertises its own services or products, it is also a sender under the CAN-SPAM Act and the rules concerning multiple senders apply (see Multiple Senders)." This is where we are in debate.

The only thing in debate here is the statement I made about whether an affiliate has the obligation to acquire an opt-in once they email as a third party. The statement above indicates that.

Enough discussion on this, I haven't use purchased lists for many many years. My doi's had always out performed them.

Any ways, we've hijacked this thread from the OP. So let's see if you guys in the know can help him.

 

[T J Tutor]

So, @germanleadseller , let's get this thread back on track for you. Sorry to have become distracted. Your needs are what this thread is supposed to be about. I am sure these guys can help you with your needs. Get them the data they asked for and see if they have a remedy for you.

My apologies!

 

[MxyzptlkFishStix]

I have always agreed that he is correct about sending as a third party. I never challenged that.
I said, "accept when being introduced by another through their list", (a 3rd party). I am not in disagreement with the right to email as a third party.

Where we are disagreeing is the interpretation of the statement in the law that states, "If the affiliate also advertises its own services or products, it is also a sender under the CAN-SPAM Act and the rules concerning multiple senders apply (see Multiple Senders)." This is where we are in debate.

The only thing in debate here is the statement I made about whether an affiliate has the obligation to acquire an opt-in once they email as a third party. The statement above indicates that.

Enough discussion on this, I haven't use purchased lists for many many years. My doi's had always out performed them.

Any ways, we've hijacked this thread from the OP. So let's see if you guys in the know can help him.

I think you're confusing CAN-SPAM with the FTC's Final rule issued in mid '08. As I've stated earlier, there is no mandate for opt-in concerning email in US law. Just get the idea of opt-in out of your mind. The Multiple Sender provision in the Final Rule has absolutely nothing to do with opt-in.

The layman's explanation:

"the definition of “sender” was modified to make it easier to determine which of multiple parties advertising in a single e-mail message is responsible for complying with the Act’s opt-out requirements"

The actual legalise can be found in the PDF above on FTC's website in the section titled "Section 316.2(m) — Definition of Sender". They even provide an example:

However, you're right. We derailed the heck out of this thread.

 

[LeadsmarketDavid]

Hey I wanted to know if any of you use SendGrid email platform. I've been coming to find that I struggle with inboxing with Gmail. Any thoughts?

 

[germanleadseller]

I'm still facing the problem that my open rates are very very low. Is there no way to ensure deliverability? From 1 to 4 percent would be enough for me.

 

[Devin@VeriAS]

I see that you have already cleaned the list for bounces, but if you would like to send me a sample of the data I can check for recent activity on the records, see how many times our system has seen it, and maybe help you uncover the problem. Let me know if you'd like me to try and help you out.

 

[simonbrep]

your list is no good - it'a always very risky purchasing lists

 

[eMonetize]

your list is no good - it'a always very risky purchasing lists

Purchasing lists is far from risky, if you know what you are doing.

 

[eMonetize]

I see that you have already cleaned the list for bounces, but if you would like to send me a sample of the data I can check for recent activity on the records, see how many times our system has seen it, and maybe help you uncover the problem. Let me know if you'd like me to try and help you out.

I thought you were a new service. What does it matter then how often your system has seen it...if you are new?

Are you using someone else's system or is it proprietary?

 

[simonbrep]

Thanks for pointing that out. I knew there was something that made 3rd party OK, it's just been so long and I wasn't in the mood to read the entire thing.

so let's do some list swapping - let's see how good your lists are....

 

[Dave Hughes]

Getting back to the original post it is probably a combination of things that combine to lead to poor deliverability and poor views.
Bad List
Creative that is triggering Spam Filters
Bad Reputation of your sending IP/domain

As you said you have cleaned your list already I would recommend that you.
Check the email creative at mail-tester.com
Check the reputation of your email infrastructure to see if it has been blacklisted or has a poor reputation. Suggest mxtoolbox, senderscore and senderbase.

 

[Matt Smith]

I'm facing problems with a few campaigns.
The open rate is very low. Like below 0,01 percent. 5000 emails sent, 2 views. I'm trying to find the error but I can't. I'm using different purchased optin email lists from the US. And also different software and mail servers.

There may be optin lists with 2% or 5% open rate, but 0,01% is very low.

What's the reason?

Like everyone else said building you own list is the way to go, I typically tell people to change up their subject line and try that but the list could be trash, what I could also suggest is to use an Email Marketing Company that is whitelisted this means nothing goes to spam so in other words if alot of your emails are not being open due to spam a whitelisted company can help you, If you want more info please contact me

 

[Graybeard]

not to get too far off track but ... there is no *opt-in* internet lingo is meaningless in a court of law ... it is called affirmative consent and its terms are pretty specific in 15 U.S.C. § 7702

15 U.S. Code § 7702 - Definitions

In this chapter:
(1) Affirmative consent
The term “affirmative consent”, when used with respect to a commercial electronic mail message, means that—

(A) the recipient expressly consented to receive the message, either in response to a clear and conspicuous request for such consent or at the recipient’s own initiative; and
(B) if the message is from a party other than the party to which the recipient communicated such consent, the recipient was given clear and conspicuous notice at the time the consent was communicated that the recipient’s electronic mail address could be transferred to such other party for the purpose of initiating commercial electronic mail messages.
​

15 U.S. Code § 7702 - Definitions

In its CAN-SPAM Act Compliance Guide for Businesses (2009), the FTC addresses this section of the Act by instructing businesses to monitor the emails that are being sent on their behalf.

Section 3 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 also places liability on companies that use spammers to advertise for them by including the following language in the definition of email "initiation": "to procure the origination or transmission of such message." See 15 U.S.C. § 7702(9). This means that companies hiring spammers are covered by the CAN-SPAM Act, as well as spammers themselves.​

CAN-SPAM Act of 2003: Businesses Promoted by Spammers

**Offered for informative value and not as legal advice -- if unclear seek legal counsel.

 

[skylerjones2018]

You have to work on the content of the mails you send.Make it exciting and interesting.particularly the title.

 

[19Joshua86]

1. It's better to build your email list on your own using email extractors, so you will be sure that you send mailouts to your target audience.
2. You should check your email list with email verifier. Maybe the email addresses in your list don't exist, so you just wast your money on mailouts.
3. Do everything you can to prevent your email from going to the spam folder. Check out the ebook with 550 Spam Trigger Words To Avoid in 2019 on Slideshare, also use the services that add unsubscribe link to the emails, so the people will use this link and will not report spam. To deal with these probable issues I can advise you Snov.io. This tool offers email finder, verifier, drip campaigns and has a forever free monthly renewable plan.