Insights From The Email Evolution Conference’s Deliverability Panel

Sparky
Feb. 4, 2015 by Sparky

deliverability_panel_eecI’m in Miami wrapping up #EEC15, The Email Evolution Conference. The closing Keynote Panel Discussion organized by Dennis Dayman and Ryan Phelan was worth the price of admission; the panel they organized featured key postmaster/abuse personal from Comcast, Hotmail/Outlook, AOL and Gmail. Although regular fixtures at M3AAWG meetings, the folks in this room don’t normally have a chance to hear first hand how an ISP measures activity within the inbox and responds to emails as they arrive. There were furrowed brows, heads nodding and a plethora of other emotions as questions were asked, assertions made, accusations levied and laughter enjoyed by all.

 

One of the most important things I took away from this session and I think you may find this valuable too are the signals that most ISPs read as good vs. bad. Here’s a cheat sheet and take away that you can help you better understand how engagement, which was called ‘a philosophical principle rather than a secret sauce’, is measured by a mailbox provider or an ISP. One of the major disconnects I’ve seen between senders and receivers is the idea that engagement is a single measure. Quite the contrary, senders are not privy to the metrics that receivers are and vice versa, there may be some attribution, analysis through web behavioral data, that leads to a very different picture of engagement on the sender side. This is the fundamental conundrum that I think is best represented by the metric system vs. the english system. Both are valid (well one’s more practical than the other), both are capable of measuring the same distance but use different units. One doesn’t invalidate the other, hence the philosophical nature of the construct.

Positive Signals

  • Open an email
  • Adding a sender to the address book
  • Moving a message to a specific folder (filing)
  • Rescuing a message from the spam folder
  • Replying to a message.

Negative Signals

  • Deleting a message without opening it
  • Marking a message as spam
  • Reporting phishing

Thankfully there are more positive signals that inform engagement at a mailbox provider than negative ones. One thing to consider: I’ve seen a number of senders instruct their recipients not to reply to an email, that the email box will not be checked or monitored. Given that replying to emails is a positive signal that will ultimately improve a sender’s engagement, leading to better reputation and finally deliverability, it might be worthwhile to make the sending addresses accept replies and even review them for customer correspondence.

1 Comment

Share your Thoughts

Your email address will not be published.

Related Content

Quorum: Revolutionizing the Legislative Process with Email

Quorum is making a big impact in politics with their analytics platform. Here's how they work as a team and live together in DC's Friendship Heights.

read more

Leveraging Substitution Data and Templates to Personalize Emails

Jeff Goldstein explains how to leverage substitution data and templates to separate the work of obtaining data for personalized emails and the creative for those emails.

read more

Email Basics for Developers Just Starting Out

Being new to the world of email is daunting. In the first part of this series, we'll walk you through the email basics of setup and deliverability.

read more

Start sending email in minutes!

The world’s most powerful email delivery solution is now yours in a developer-friendly, quick to set up cloud service. Open a SparkPost account today and send up to 100,000 emails per month for free.

Send 100K Emails/Month For Free

Send this to friend