I switched my newsletters from Substack and Mailchimp to Buttondown
guzey.com
guzey.com
Buttondown just may just be more generous (less rigorous) in detecting false positives.
Deliverability is also partially on you (versus the provider) and is not necessarily easy to get right (nor is it necessarily consistent between email blasts).
>37% of openers clicked a link (I think this is because Mailchimp’s links are black rather than blue and it’s easy to miss them)
IMO, if they aren't doing anything to customize the appearance of their emails then this experiment isn't worth much. It also makes it sound like the emails weren't completely identical, which makes click rate comparisons invalid.
Some of the bullets are helpful, but I wouldn't take this as any kind of gospel.
Also, the author has even written an article titled "Don't Believe Self-Reported Data"[0]. In light of some of the other comments about the data not quite stacking up, perhaps he should take his own advice.
[0]: https://guzey.com/statistics/dont-believe-self-reported-data...
A company so clueless about internet security as to send out in bulk what are indistinguishable from phishing attempts clearly cannot be trusted to help manage your login/signup process.
And, any company seen to trust an outsourcer as clueless as Mailchimp cannot be trusted with your personal information, never mind your banking or stock transactions.
For particular example, Carta, a stock certificate management site, uses such an e-mail outsourcer.
The Surprising Science of Alpha Male Chimps, TED Talk by Frans de Waal:
Have you looked at MailerLite[1]?
for 5k-10k people, on monthly plan:
Mailchimp: $80
MailerLite: $50
EmailOctopus: $24
If there are any services that allow me to import my previous list and email them (very) occasionally for a reasonable price, I’d love to know about them.
It did not and I regret the move!
Also, I miss the markdown editor on Buttondown…
I wonder if these results can be replicated. Is there a detailed description of the process? I'm now especially interested in seeing the emails that were delivered to the users.
The UI of Mailchimp felt like a real catastrophe; incredibly complex and unintuitive. Worse, the text editor was a real nightmare to use and embeds were not great at all. Mailchimp basically felt like a Matryoshka doll with screens in screens in screens in screens, to an almost comical point (except it wasn't fun).
Revue is MUCH simpler, has an excellent and easy to use editor, good-looking embeds (links, tweets), also the possibility to create a paid newsletter. In addition, Revue has native integration within Twitter, which is very nice and helps with growth. Revue isn't as powerful as Mailchimp and others around analytics and other features, but I don't mind at this stage.
Documentation can be found here: https://roneo.org/en/a-newsletter-with-hugo-buttondown-and-n...
I realise it's much more complicated than this, that within a given ESP there are multiple bundles of senders and that better customers get moved to a better bundle etc, but my guess is that for any given level within Substack you're being bundled with an unusually-bad group of peers and therefore getting lower open rates -- I would love to know if this is an accurate understanding, or if there's any accurate way to test this from outside Substack.
This is a great theory. I'm subscribed to a bunch of Substacks, and most send fewer but longer posts which I always open and read. While others treat their Substack like a Twitter feed and send out lots of short posts a day which I hardly ever open.
Alex Berenson has already sent me 3 mails today, and the day isn't over yet...but there are other lesser known people who send far more. And some of those others are crypto/forex/finance writers who by the nature of their content, spam filters may view more suspiciously.