Re: UKNM: Re: marketing spam

[Duncan Macmillan]

James,


But all of the spam I have received is from companies with no brand equity.

What do they have to lose?  And if they do get a bad rep, they just change their

name.


It's viable for most brandless vibroplug spammers, but not for your

brand-wealthy clients.


James Tarin wrote:


> >Tim Jackson in his FT column a week or two back was not the first to point

> >out that the economics of spam are different from dm generally. Because the

> >incremental cost of delivering additional messages is close to zero, there

> >is no significant disincentive to spamming.

>

> What about the costs associated with damage to brand equity? This could

> easily be a consequence of spam as opposed to useful mail, and in my

> eyes a significant disincentive to spamming.

>

> Just because the direct response numbers add up does not mean that the

> overall economics are viable.

>

> jim

> _______________________

> James Tarin

> Director of Strategy

> Clarity Communications

> 1 Long Lane

> London EC1A 9HA

> Voice: 0171 397 2900

> Fax: 01717 397 2939




--

Duncan Macmillan

__________________________

Account Manager, CommUnity

W: http://www.community.net.uk/

T: +44 (0)1865 856014  F: +44 (0)1865 856001

E:

duncan [dot] macmillancommunity [dot] net [dot] uk

Ranked No.1 ISP - Internet

Winner of Internet Magazine January 1998 Web Design Challenge


"Adding rooms to a house is a really bad way to build a skyscraper."