When it comes to email marketing, is customer attention a valuable resource that should be managed with care? Or is it more like a commodity that can be used as needed?
With email marketing, it’s generally easier to send broad-based communication to an entire list than it is to segment, customise and target. The relatively low cost of email negates any savings in terms of reduced volumes. Why spend time slicing up your list when the direct cost saving may only be a few hundred dollars?
For DM, the high cost of print and distribution ensures that you need to get your segmentation and targeting to an economically optimum number that will generate the response you need.
However, we are seeing that over time, lists grow tired. Customers start to switch off after a succession of emails fails to spark their interest. This is measured through declining open rates over time. Unsubscribe rates are low but steady, which indicates that most customers are not opting out. They are not being as receptive as they were to begin with.
Does it pay to invest in getting this right?
What’s the return on investment for keeping a customer’s interest?
What’s the opportunity cost when they switch off?
When it comes to email marketing, is it quantity or quality that we are seeking?
We'd like to hear your thoughts.
Customer Attention: Valuable resource or marketing commodity?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Posted by returnity at 7:55 AM
Labels: analytics , email marketing , open rates , response , returnity
0 comments :
Post a Comment