Marketing & SEO Discussion List - LED Digest

Written by Ronni Rhodes
February 13, 2006

AOL, Goodmail & the Telcos

Let's cut to the chase, folks.

What are the ramifications going to be if charging for "superior" access to e-mail boxes happens? Or, for that matter, having to pay for "superior" access to broadband pipes? Is the "free" internet going to disappear?

Warm regards,

wbcimaging.com

Written by Red Charie
February 13, 2006

"AOL and Yahoo are planning to begin charging what amounts to postage for those sending multiple email messages to their subscribers. They're positioning it as an anti-spam measure, but it will also have hamper distribution of free information by small and non-profit publishers. AOL and Yahoo say the charge will amount to a penny or less per email."

While it is true that this is a small amount, look what it would mean to lists like this LED Digest if other ISPs follow suit. Assuming a membership of 75,000 being emailed their LED Digest “fix” 5 times a week, this would cost the list owners $195,000 a year at a penny a pop. Even taking their low ball suggestion of .25 of a cent per would still be MUCH more than the list owners could afford. Man, those pennies really add up. I feel this is a blatant effort to wring yet more money out of the internet users, and if AOL and Yahoo get their foot in the door, other suppliers are certain to follow suit. 

What can you do?  First, if you use either (or both) services, write to or phone AOL. For Yahoo (Go to Yahoo Mail, then to Mail Help, then, at the bottom, to 'Contact Yahoo Mail Customer Care') and complain. This is important - your complaints might be the only thing that might persuade these companies to change their mind. However, if you don't complain, other email services will be encouraged to do the same thing.

Red Charie

dotcom-productions.com

Written by Ken Evoy
February 13, 2006

"What are the ramifications going to be if charging for "superior" access to e-mail boxes happens?" - Ronnie Rhodes

The Internet is the greatest enabler of capitalism and libertarianism in the history of the world.  Without a vote being "cast" in elections (a wonderful process hijacked by politicians long ago) and without a shot being fired, the Net leads the revolution to freedom. Part of that is allowing and congratulating those who know how to make money online, whether that be AOL and Yahoo! or the sole proprietor who is just starting out.

They do not need to justify themselves, but they spend exorbitant amounts on spam.  This won't eliminate the "free" sending of e-mail, simply guarantee arrival of e-mail by those who pay.  It will, of course, not happen UNLESS their primary customers, their subscribers, object.  If they do not, then the service must be of value, especially since they'll be glad NOT to pay for it.

To those who object to others making money online, I  say... Relax.  It is the way the world works.  Nothing stays the same.  Of course, we will suddenly have a large expense ourselves.  But we can adjust, accelerate our move to RSS for example.  And beyond adjusting... Spot a market opportunity that this development opens up.  Several come to mind for us.

All the best,

Ken Evoy

webmaster.sitesell.com

---

Written by Rob Forker
February 14, 2006

Another take on the charging subject. Copied from Paul Myers' TalkBiz newsletter.

As published in talkbiznews.com ...

There's been a lot of smoke and heat (but very little light) about the recent announcement that AOL and Yahoo will be rolling out Goodmail's CertifiedEmail system for their networks.

I've been getting questions on it from all over, and heard some outrageous claims and fears. Everything from "All email is going to be charged for" to "This is going to kill small publishers" to "This is just a 'pay to spam' system!"

Ummm... No. In the immortal words of Douglas Adams: Don't Panic!

The basic point that needs to be made is simple: For the moment, nothing changes for anyone who chooses not to pay for Goodmail's certification. First, let's be clear: CertifiedEmail is not in any way, shape or form, an attempt to reduce spam. It's a system that allows end users to immediately recognize legitimate email from paying senders whose identities have been checked and verified. The mechanism is more involved than that but, to the end user, that's the whole effect in a nutshell.

The thing that makes it so attractive to ISPs is that it's much more effective in making that identification reliably than other systems have been in the past. If you're on a system that uses CertifiedEmail and get a message with Goodmail's stamp on it, a little emblem shows on your mailer's interface that tells you it's really what it claims to be. Doesn't matter whether you call it accreditation, certification, email ID or green jell-o. That's all it does.

Rob Forker

---

Written by A. Hughart
February 15, 2006

"If you're on a system that uses CertifiedEmail and get a message with Goodmail's stamp on it, a little emblem shows on your mailer's interface that tells you it's really what it claims to be." - Paul Myers' TalkBiz

... and, it's only a matter of time when we'll start getting emails with fake Goodmail stamps on them...

AOL and Yahoo already have everything in place to check senders identities like many other ISP providers that charge for mail boxes. IMO, to call it "certified mail" like it's something special is yet another marketing ploy. But, hey, why didn't we think of that...

A. Hughart

bonsavon.com

Written by Bill Davison
February 16, 2006

The ONLY effective method to end Spam is serious *prosecution*!

Unfortunately, SpamCop, CAUCE, etc. punish mostly those who send legitimate opt-in email because their methods are so haphazard. I've had legitimate opt-in senders promptly threatened with host server blackmail if they sent even 30 emails to their customers. Never have I been able to successfully challenge or correspond even once with either of these agencies.

What then has been the result? An explosion of spam primarily from Oriental servers. All the self appointed vigilantes have accomplished is to force even legitimate opt-in emailers to hire off shore oriental companies to email their clients along with those who do nothing but spam.

Most large corporations have been forced to hire other companies to filter their corporate email. Now we have phishing... that's blatant fraud. This has now become so flagrant that on-line financial companies just auto respond their answer to complaints.

Then were is it going to end? It's a fact, all email can be traced. Until ISPs and governments join together and decide to stop the nonsense and end token prosecution, we are left with few options:

a) Use software filtering and / or total encryption

b) hire someone else to filter

... and continue paying through the nose to those who are always willing to take advantage and profit from someone's grief.

Bill Davison

---

Written by Andrew Bourland
February 17, 2006

"Assuming a membership of 75,000 being emailed their LED Digest “fix” 5 times a week, this would cost the list owners $195000 a year at a penny a pop." - Reg Charie

There are a few problems with that argument...

First of all, ALL of the subscribers to this list are not on AOL or on Yahoo. A good portion of them are, but nothing in the ballpark you are talking about.

Second, speaking from my own experience as a list moderator, most of the bounces and email problems emanate from two sources: AOL and Hotmail. Most moderators would not fret over their absence.

Third, if this were an imminent reality, it would behoove the owner of the list to ask all of his AOL / Yahoo / whatever subscribers to resubscribe from another domain. Most of us have them. I have my own vanity domain, plus a Yahoo address and a GMail account. At some point in time, the windows would have to be shut to subscribers from those domains, as harsh as that might sound. None of us would like it, but those services who choose to take that route give us little choice in the matter.

I agree that we should let our views be known, but let's face it: a postage stamp strategy would be fairly effective for those spammers who add as many as 400 spams to my Yahoo mailbox every single DAY. It would take all the profit out of spamming, which I truly believe is their objective. If they happen to make some money off of this approach, that's fine. It will be offset by the loss of users like us, who chose to go elsewhere for their free email services.

Andrew Bourland

bourland.com

---

If you are going to quote me, Andrew, please keep it in context.

In LED 2095 I said:

"While it is true that this is a small amount, look what it would mean to lists like this LED Digest if other ISPs follow suit. Assuming a membership of 75,000 being emailed their LED Digest fix 5 times a week, this would cost the list owners $195000 a year at a penny a pop."

Please note the "if other ISPs follow suit" which is the key modifier. I feel that if AOL and Yahoo are successful with their ploy, other email providers will not be far behind.

Thank You,