Only 57% of marketers measure email campaign results within 24-48 hours after the email is sent and only18% measure email results on an annual basis according to a report by Email Stat Center (http://www.emailstatcenter.com/). The survey found that deliverability and clickthrough rates were considered to be the most important metrics when evaluating results.
I find these statistics surprising. One of the major advantages of email marketing is the rapid feedback, so I monitor these metrics carefully to determine which email campaigns are successful and which need improvement. Here are definitions of some of the metrics that I consider to be important.
Deliverability is the percentage of emails that Internet Service Providers allow to be placed into one of the addressee’s boxes. Some larger email service providers boast deliverability rates of 96% - 99%. It does not, however, necessarily indicate the percentage of emails that reached inboxes rather than the junk mail or spam boxes.
Hard bounce means that the email could not be delivered for a reason such as a nonexistent email address in which case sending it again will not remedy the situation.
Soft bounce is created by a temporary situation, such as a full inbox or a problem with the recipient’s email server.
Open rates refer to the percentage of emails that recipients click on and actually open. Open rates are obtained by obtained by dividing the number of emails opened by the number of emails sent and multiplying the result by 100. .
Clickthrough rates refer to the percentage of links clicked on by recipients. The clickthrough rate is obtained by dividing the number of clicks by the number of emails opened and multiplying the result by 100. Unique clickthroughs are the percentage of clickthroughs from different recipients. Total clickthrough rates reflect the percentage of clickthroughs from both unique and returning recipients.
Conversion rates are considered by many to be one of the most significant measures of success. The conversion rate is calculated by dividing the number of email recipients who actually clicked through to a website and took the desired action (purchased something, competed a registration form, provided information or whatever purpose the email was supposed to serve) divided by the total number of people who received the email multiplied by 100.
However, the Email Experience Council (http://www.emailexperience.org/) found that it is impossible to establish industry standards because of the lack of consistency in the calculation of these and other key performance metrics (March 2007).
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Web 2.0: You and Me and an International Village
Like many of you, I have evolved from a passive web user to an active participant in web communities. I network on linkedin, check products on ebay, comment on photos on Flickr, view videos on YouTube, search MySpace and Facebook, create tags for technorati, read the South Florida Public Relations Network message board, and encourage emailed comments on my blog.
With Web 2.0, the Internet has evolved from a static collection of websites that were basically a library-like repository of information and a showcase for public, private, and municipal organizations into a collection of communities where users are encouraged to participate and join. Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia which allows almost anyone to post or edit articles, defines Web 2.0 as follows:
“Web 2.0 refers to a perceived second generation of web-based communities and hosted services — such as social-networking sites, wikis, and folksonomies — which aim to facilitate creativity…, collaboration, and sharing between users. The term gained currency following the first O'Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004… Although the term suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but to changes in the ways software developers and end-users use webs.”
Folksonomies are tags or methods of organizing and bookmarking information into meaningful categories that add value and enable groups to easily find relevant documents, graphics, photos, products, or data. Because of the proliferation of information sharing on the web, folksonomies on sites such as technorati, delic.io.us, and flickr have become increasingly popular.
Web 2.0 websites share certain characteristics. They:
• Are interactive and dynamic with user-friendly interfaces
• Enable users to interact with each other as individuals, communities,
networks, or friends
• Allow users to access web-based applications through a variety of web
browsers
• Have long tails that enable narrow niches to reach out through the entire web
• Encourage user participation because users add value
• Facilitate cooperation rather than control
I recently attended a presentation sponsored by IBM that illustrated the use of social software in a corporate community. The employee directory features employee photographs, locations, contact information, job descriptions, interests, and pertinent information that the employee wishes to disclose. Employees in far-flung locations can work together in groups by uploading and sharing information or can join non work-related special interest online communities.
There is no doubt that Web 2.0 has changed the way that we live, work, shop, entertain ourselves, obtain information, and acquire new friends. And the power of Web 2.0 is that it enables all of us to leave our footprints on the Internet.
With Web 2.0, the Internet has evolved from a static collection of websites that were basically a library-like repository of information and a showcase for public, private, and municipal organizations into a collection of communities where users are encouraged to participate and join. Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia which allows almost anyone to post or edit articles, defines Web 2.0 as follows:
“Web 2.0 refers to a perceived second generation of web-based communities and hosted services — such as social-networking sites, wikis, and folksonomies — which aim to facilitate creativity…, collaboration, and sharing between users. The term gained currency following the first O'Reilly Media Web 2.0 conference in 2004… Although the term suggests a new version of the World Wide Web, it does not refer to an update to any technical specifications, but to changes in the ways software developers and end-users use webs.”
Folksonomies are tags or methods of organizing and bookmarking information into meaningful categories that add value and enable groups to easily find relevant documents, graphics, photos, products, or data. Because of the proliferation of information sharing on the web, folksonomies on sites such as technorati, delic.io.us, and flickr have become increasingly popular.
Web 2.0 websites share certain characteristics. They:
• Are interactive and dynamic with user-friendly interfaces
• Enable users to interact with each other as individuals, communities,
networks, or friends
• Allow users to access web-based applications through a variety of web
browsers
• Have long tails that enable narrow niches to reach out through the entire web
• Encourage user participation because users add value
• Facilitate cooperation rather than control
I recently attended a presentation sponsored by IBM that illustrated the use of social software in a corporate community. The employee directory features employee photographs, locations, contact information, job descriptions, interests, and pertinent information that the employee wishes to disclose. Employees in far-flung locations can work together in groups by uploading and sharing information or can join non work-related special interest online communities.
There is no doubt that Web 2.0 has changed the way that we live, work, shop, entertain ourselves, obtain information, and acquire new friends. And the power of Web 2.0 is that it enables all of us to leave our footprints on the Internet.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Email Marketing: The Numbers Behind the Buzz
Despite the ascent of Web 2.0, IMs, and text messaging, email marketing is still growing in importance in the marketing mix. And according to Datran Media Research (“The 2007 Email Marketing Survey”), 83% of the marketers who responded thought that email ROI will increase over last year. Statistics collected from a variety of additional sources indicate that email marketing still has a bright future.
The Direct Marketing Association’s 2006 Response Rate Trends Report finds that the highest direct marketing response rates result from telemarketing (2.6%) and email (2.45%). Email’s ROI index is 70% higher than any other method of direct-response marketing. The organization also estimates that marketers in the United States alone will spend $500 million on email marketing which is expected to generate almost $22 billion in sales.
Following are some statistics cited by Internet Retailer (2007) as a result of its monthly surveys:
- 18.7% of internet retailers indicated that email generates 1% to 2.5% of sales
- 37.4% of online merchants find that email generates between 2.51% and 15%
of revenues
- For 11% of online merchants, email drives more than 25% of total sales
- Nearly three-quarters (73%) of chain retailers, catalogers, virtual merchants, and consumer brand manufacturers report spending only 5% or less of their total marketing budgets on email marketing
Compared to other forms of online marketing, email delivers sales at an average cost per order of less than $7, compared to $71.89 for banner ads, $26.75 for paid search and $17.47 for affiliate programs. - Shop.org, State of Retailing Online 2007 report (Sept. 2007);
For additional email marketing statistics, you can visit the following websites:
http://www.emailstatcenter.com/
http://www.internetretailer.com/
http://www.the-dma.org/
http://www.mediapost.com/
The Direct Marketing Association’s 2006 Response Rate Trends Report finds that the highest direct marketing response rates result from telemarketing (2.6%) and email (2.45%). Email’s ROI index is 70% higher than any other method of direct-response marketing. The organization also estimates that marketers in the United States alone will spend $500 million on email marketing which is expected to generate almost $22 billion in sales.
Following are some statistics cited by Internet Retailer (2007) as a result of its monthly surveys:
- 18.7% of internet retailers indicated that email generates 1% to 2.5% of sales
- 37.4% of online merchants find that email generates between 2.51% and 15%
of revenues
- For 11% of online merchants, email drives more than 25% of total sales
- Nearly three-quarters (73%) of chain retailers, catalogers, virtual merchants, and consumer brand manufacturers report spending only 5% or less of their total marketing budgets on email marketing
Compared to other forms of online marketing, email delivers sales at an average cost per order of less than $7, compared to $71.89 for banner ads, $26.75 for paid search and $17.47 for affiliate programs. - Shop.org, State of Retailing Online 2007 report (Sept. 2007);
For additional email marketing statistics, you can visit the following websites:
http://www.emailstatcenter.com/
http://www.internetretailer.com/
http://www.the-dma.org/
http://www.mediapost.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)