For my lists, I operated under the assumption that permission is not optional – You must ask. It’s considered a best practice approach.

However, despite my advice, the lure of short term incentives proved too enticing for one of the other company’s. The company manager told me about his brilliant idea to take the CC’d email addresses in messages received from customers, and partners and add these to the house list. Since their messages include opt-out links, and comply with other Can Spam rules they’re not breaking any law.

Naturally, they get opt outs with each send. They haven’t been blacklisted. And they do get leads. I’ve made them aware of the risks involved with their actions, and they’ve made an informed choice. If you plan plan on skirting email best practices, here’s something you should be aware of…

You can comply with Can Spam, but still be perceived as a spammer by recipients.

While you can inflate a list with email addresses, you can’t buy or steal subscriber engagement. What problems will arise from communications that are not opt in?

● Depressed response rates. People will ignore your messages leading to low open rates, click-throughs, and a high opt-out rate leading to shrinking list syndrome.

● Decreased deliverability. People will become trigger happy with the spam button, leading to your emails being blacklisted by ISP’s. If this happens, you’ll be more likely to get an even number of socks from the wash than your emails into in boxes.

● Loss of trust & damaged brand credibility. Being accused of spam will damage your reputation beyond deliverability. People are more likely to point out spamming on blogs, and online reviews which could show up in search engine results.

What do you think it will take for companies to realize that an opt-in, engaged subscriber list is more profitable than email addresses obtained through questionable means?

Photo credit Cobalt123