So-Called Safelists Revisited

"About your article, "Safelists Aren't Safe" (DoctorEbiz, May 28, 2003), safelists are safe when they are used properly and are an excellent advertising tool. I have used many safelists over the years and even own a few. I cannot believe people who have never used them can talk so bad about them." -- Patricia

My article on "safelists" referred to lists of e-mail addresses that were sold or circulated. You seem to be referring a kind of safelist which members "join" and must confirm their e-mail addresses before activation. AdTactics Safelists may be typical of these. I would describe their model as:

• Opt-in. E-mails are sent only to confirmed opt-in members.
• Motivated. The motivation for people to join is to be able to send their own e-mails to the list of members. The motivation to read bulk e-mails from other members is the single credit you get for "reading" each e-mail, defined as clicking through and staying on the member's website for a minimum of 20 seconds.
• Credit based. Each credit can be used to send out one e-mail. The more credits you have, the more e-mails you can send to members. You get credits (1) monthly, (2) by "reading" e-mails, and/or (3) by purchasing them.
• Fee based. Free members can send up to 15,000 e-mails to members each month. Paid members can send more e-mails. For example, a "Partner" level member pays $20/month for 250,000 monthly credits. In addition, top membership categories can use personalization, HTML e-mail, and an online HTML editor. You can also purchase credits -- such as 125,000 credits (e-mails) for $20.

On the face of it, this seems extremely inexpensive. But you know what they say: "If it's sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't." Here are the flaws I see:

1. Lack of targeting. E-mails are untargeted, having nothing to do with any identified interest in the recipient -- except the recipient's desire to send out e-mails. Untargeted lists perform extremely poorly.
2. Deliverability of E-mails. Today, every ISP uses spam filters to survive the onslaught of e-mails. Senders with a poor reputation are often blacklisted. "Trigger words" in subject lines and messages also cut deliverability.
3. Get-Rich-Quick E-Mail Subject Lines. In the e-mails I received, subject lines read: "I hate nickels and dimes ... I love $500 and $997 each!" or "PS Fr ee Money?" or "Warning: Exploding bank accounts." Nearly all the subject lines were like this.
4. Volume of E-Mails. Within three hours after signing up I had received 34 e-mails. Any legitimate list manager severely limits e-mails to any individual subscriber. Otherwise, the list "wears out" and becomes valueless because people no longer read the e-mails. There's no way I am going to read 34 e-mails in three hours and spend 20 seconds on each site. The motivation of "credit for reading e-mails" in this model is bogus.
5. CAN-SPAM Violations. Of the 34 e-mails, 26% had no unsubscribe link at all, while 74% had a link requiring you to remember your contact e-mail address, which is different from the address to which the e-mail was sent. If you can't remember, tough luck. You are doomed to a barrage of e-mails forever.

Is this model a useful one for Internet marketers? No. So-called "safelists" are neither safe nor effective marketing tools. Avoid them!