Just wanted to say great system, been using now for about 6 months with no troubles.
However, I have a query I hope you have time to respond to - We have always suffered from what I would consider a low open rate - say about 25%. I realise that the more disparate the campaign from the receivers, relevance etc, can lead to unopened emails.
But one send out for one of our clients (a yacht club) actually involved all this client's friends; he knew them all personally. And when asked in person about the email, many said they'd never received it. The reports for this campaign stood at 45% opened. We probably stand somewhere overall at about 15%.
Now, one thing that was not done then, which I have now successfully set up, is the domain key / sender id DNS amends.
This is now done, and confirmed in the system as correct. Admitedly I have not yet sent a campaign with this account, with this in place -but want to iminently.
However, I still cannot even receive my own tests. I have read the article on sending tests with the same from as the to, so have played with using different domain from addresses. no luck.
I have sent off a load of tests to friends with various email addresses, and a few have reported as not seeing it.
Coming into play of course is the likely hood of the content of the email being spammy. Running the (limited) spam report for this email only brought up a couple of things - the use of the word Advertising, and the use of the word House, and the text sizes. Adjusting all of this, didn't result in me receiving any test messages.
So, sorry for the longwinded email, I'm just trying to work out this stage, how usable CM is, and whether any other systems would differ. I still wonder about the possibility of servers knowing it hasn't come from the address we pretend it has, and deleting as spam. Whether other desktop based systems would better this I don't know.
If you have any thoughts or help or advice or pointers or anything on this, that I haven't already read in the help and forums, i would be most pleased to hear it.
A quick addition to this -
a test to a Fastmail email account (fastmail.fm) came back with warnings on URLs in the emailer.
I've amended the URL name to protect the innocent!
a link on the emailer, as an example, should go to www.example.com/newsletter/jan08. Which is the URL of where to see it online, if not displayed correctly. In Fastmail however, it comes up with this warning -
"WARNING: URL text and host don't match, possible phishing attempt. URL disabled."
This is because campaign monitor alters URLs in an emailer, and then when clicked on them, sort of reverts back to the original.
So the original URL was www.example.com/newsletter/jan08
But as far as Fastmail sees it, this URL is http://example/cmail4.com/t/y/l/dtlhyu/l/r
Any thoughts on this guys? Could this lead to my spam woes?
Yes, yes and yes. Email clients place big flags on this kind of hyperlink mismatching as it is a very common spam trick. Thankfully, there is also a very simple solution - don't make the hyperlink text the url, make it descriptive.
eg: instead of:
<a href="www.example.com/newsletter/jan08">January 08 Newsletter</a>
This should hopefully improve things a little!
Stormy, that is a simple but effective work around, why didn't i think of that!
however, testing still doesn't work.
On another note, I've noticed on a few people's test emails, that the To address is actually someone from the database of addresses the emailer would be sent out to! This can't be helping spam issues either??
My name is Michael Palin, but when I receive the test message, my name shows up as John Cleese in the To field. But when double clicking on the name, shows the correct Michael Palin email address. I didn't think the personalisation option in CM would extend to changing the person's Outlook settings? (or pretending to)
This is actually because we're using a random subscribers details to populate any custom fields in your email so you can confirm everything is set up correctly. Because you're sending the test to yourself, your email address is the one we need to use as the To address.
If you're still having problems receiving emails, it might be best to get in touch with your mail administrator to see why the email isn't getting through, but isn't being returned as a bounce.
thanks for responding Dave.
But most people's test email received, and indeed my own (when logging onto the server to pull down from the junk), come in as the correct persons name in the To bit.
A few though don't as I mentioned earlier. It's not a customfield I've put in there (eg, Dear...Tom), it's the To address in the Outlook pane itself.
I should clarify something though - my test emails to myself are succesfully sent and received, but don't go through to my inbox directly, or even the Junk folder in Outlook - they are hovering still on the server at our end as they've been flagged as spam.
The other cases I mentioned of people not receiving, their systems are not even showing there ever was an email. ( I guess, they won't have access to higher level checking)
2 hours later, I've now read alot about email headers.
I can see CM all over it on the test emails received. I can also see that the headers are now different as I have set up the SPF and domain key. But still CM mentions everywhere. Could this be a big issue for spam filters getting fussy?
As a test, I have just sent out from my own Outlook, the same html email which outright failed previously to one person. I used a domain and email address he won't have received anything from me before. So not whitelisted in anyway. He received OK.
So I'm guessing this shows that it isn't the content of the email that's at fault, more the sending process?
Thanks for the follow up. This really could be being caused by a whole host of reasons that may or may not be CM related. I can certainly confirm that our server sending reputation and the way we structure our headers shouldn't trigger spam filters, especially if you are authenticating.
Please fire through an email to support with details about the email in question and a little more about what you're experiencing. We can run some tests of our own and try and get to the bottom of it for you.
I will do a little more testing content side first, then when exhausted, see what you make of it.
Thanks again for the Support.