Oliver states that identifying that identifying quality over quantity is a step towards identifying the real and root cost of increase in email frequency. I completely disagree with this. This is because it is not only that the client will unsubscribe from such emails; he may also block them or filter them. This only shows that the cause of a failed emailing process is based on the emailing frequency. Oliver argues that this goes to prove that there is a lot to weigh in before deciding what determines poor results from the increase in emailing frequency. Here, I support you Oliver in your point that it is the conversion rate that really matters, because if a client reads the email and does not act on it, this would not reflect on the income of the company.
Just like I expected, Niltpal reiterated Oliver’s opinion that it is much more important to factor in the fact that more people mark such emails as junk mail instead of unsubscribing. This should be put in mind while calculating using the retention formulae. Niltpal however does not support Oliver’s opinion that the use of creative costs should be avoided. He thinks it’s an important aspect in the identification of marketing effectiveness, a view I strongly oppose. However, the testing issue is a point to reckon with. This is because without testing one cannot really identify the weaknesses or strengths of the emailing system. I tend think that the analysis is lacking in nature. This is because it lacks the ability to address that various weaknesses in email conversion process, which refers to the number of clients who actually act on the email, visiting the website and learning new information.
Michelle also chips in the discussion by identifying that it is truly important to identify that in the process of calculating the quantitative cost with equations, what really matters is the delicate balance between underexposure and overexposure in the emailing process. Michelle thinks that Oliver is wrong when stating that the use of cost per visit and the use of conversion rates from the analysis of other students as an exact math. She thinks that adding the deliverability analysis to the KPI calculation would improve the results that are being viewed. She tends to think that the use of the social networking as a marketing tool would make a product go viral. This has been the case for many other products, which has been agreed upon by the other students. Aimee completely agrees with Michelle’s opinion on the whole matter. She too thinks that it is important to use social media to improve the conversion rate from digital methods instead of relying completely on the emailing process.
points out that he agrees with Popov’s and McDonald’s analysis that an increase in email frequency can be quite favorable for a company in the short term but not so in the long term. He however disagrees in the way the stated hypothesis was carried out. He points out that because the formulae left out some important key components. He goes ahead to point out that Oliver’s article is assuming that when a client is not active over the emailing process; that he is not being effected upon by his contents. He however disapproves this by saying that the emailing process, when done gradually could actually be used in building a company image before actually business commences, a point that is legit according to me, but rarely matters in the conversion rate.
References
Henry, Ethan (2010). Basic Email Metrics – Module 3: Web Intelligence. From
Liversedge, Steve (2010). Testing Email Effectiveness – Module 3: Web Intelligence. From http://online.tmap.cstudies.ubc.ca/mod/book/view.php?id=23548&chapterid=45093
Liversedge, Steve (2010). Customer Retention – Module 3: Web Intelligence. From
Novo, Jim (2010). Drilling Down: Turning Customer Data into Profits with a Spreadsheet. From
