If this concept is foreign to you, then you may only read the story as tips to spam people. That knee-jerk mostly just indicates you have never been in one of the two above job roles.
Guess blogs — PR — Reporters — Co-marketing with partners —Guests on podcasts — Most notable speakers at conferences
All require one party to make first contact. That first contact is often a "cold" email.
It's a bit embarrassing reading the comments. It makes painfully clear how ignorant the tech side of an org is about how their employers marketing and lead-gen departments work. That blog about a partner's integration that was published on the exact same day as the parter published about your company? Yeah, that's not magic.
It also reflects how much she believes in the product, to put so much effort in the emails day in and day out.
I'm the author of the article, you can ask me anything :)
1. Did you find that some people were flagging you as spam, and then your legitimate emails were not being delivered? I guess since you sent these emails individually and personalized them, the spam flag did not get hit often?
2. For the content partnerships, what kind of content did you find to be most attractive?
> I’ve personally typed and carefully went through every single email I sent.
Then I would definitely consider that cold mail, and not spam. A targeted, personal, concise email is worth 1,000 spammy emails (and perhaps approaches infinity if you factor in negative strikes against "good faith"). The difference is more qualitative than quantitative.
Source and another informative read: https://www.leadfuze.com/what-is-cold-email-and-is-it-spam/
If it's "too generic" the recruiter is dismissed as being lazy and spamming - "too personal" and the recruiter is fake.
I do understand what you mean and have seen recruiters that try to get a bit too chummy. By relating to someone, I might mention if we went to the same college or if I know people from their company or group they belong to. I'm not going to ask about their kids or spouse unless it's someone I know well.
I would dislike someone saying they went to the same university as me, because I don't care - I recognise that others differ, but to me, it seems fake and try-hard.
But I would like something like "your $project on github is interesting", or "I liked your blog post about".
(Attempting to fake this can go wrong. I've had emails that said things like "we were impressed by your github portfolio, particularly in Python and C", which sounds spammy because you could easily generate that by scraping Github, and I barely use C.)
You know your job better than me, but that's how I would think to avoid seeming either too spammy or too chummy.
These are great tips and the results speak for themselves. Kudos.
One email, one focus. Send 8 different emails to every prospect. Four days apart. 30% responses come from email 5-8.
Keep it conversational, in first person.
Create benefit driven messages. How your product can help solve their problems?
Cold emails should be 2-5 sentences.
Again keep it conversational.
Keep words and sentences bare minimum.
Prove your worth. Show social proof or case study.
A/B test your message. Different value propositions. Different time/day.
Thursday Friday better than Monday.
I'm honestly surprised that this works. If someone sent more than 2 or 3 unsolicited emails to me, they would end up in the killfile really fast.
I should probably do my due reading on the subject before asking, but why is that so?
Looking at the statistics, from what I remember, I believe Thur/Fri had the best open rates. (end of week, people catching up on emails before heading out, creating todo lists, ect...)
It's obviously still useful to break it down by the referring website, it just seems like an opportunity to inflate your conversion rate numbers.
Yes. It gives too much weight to sites that referred a smaller number of people, and too little to sites that referred a larger number.
> Shouldn't the "average conversion rate" be just the sum total of users that go to Toggl and sign up over the total number of users that went to Toggl?
Not "users that go to Toggl", but "users that are referred to Toggl from one of those sources", on both sides of the fraction. (Possibly you knew this, but it seemed worth clarifying.)
Equivalently, a weighted average of the conversion rates, weighted by the number of referrals from each source.
> it just seems like an opportunity to inflate your conversion rate numbers.
Note that this could deflate numbers just as well as inflate them.
One email promised to give our company access to one of our major customers... That we show prominently on our web page as a major customer. They also promised to give us access to our previous parent company that still held a minority stake in the company, and who we still sell package deals with.
Another email was from someone who went through my linkedin and was trying to sell me something. I wasn't sure what it is and I was too busy to take the 20 minutes to figure out what it was and why it was useful. I think the email was hand-written, but as I couldn't figure out why this was useful, it was easier to ignore than engage.
Here’s the message she sent, it’s obviously a mass email they sent to everyone with existing posts.
Please update the content on your website if you mention Toggl's old pricing structure.
Hey, thanks for mentioning Toggl at Mark Lyon. We just had a major update I think you should know about - we made changes in the pricing structure.
For starters, the existing pro plan now costs $10 per user per month. We have added the options to pay either annually or monthly, depending on the user’s preference.
You can see the full new pricing structure here - https://blog.toggl.com/2016/03/pro-plus-and-pricing/
NB: If you mention Toggl out-of date pricing of $5 per user anywhere on your website, please change it to $10 when billed monthly and $9 when billed annually.
You can find the latest screenshots and logos here. Please make sure Toggl's listing on your website is accurate and up to date.
Finally, let me introduce myself - I'm Dunja, I'm the Media Manager at Toggl and would love to work with you in the future! We always have something to share and would love to see how we can work together.
Please let me know after you've updated the prices, and include your postal address, I'd love to send you some Toggl swag to say thank you!
I replied, letting them know I appreciated the updated info and had made changes as a result. It went into a ticketing system and they thanked me for doing so. A few weeks later, a bunch of stickers and a bag arrived via air mail. That was nice.
As much as I hate spam and “content marketing”, I was actually pretty happy with this contact as it helped me provide better information. I also really like their service, which also probably contributes to my desire to interpret their actions in a positive light. Contrast with the regular parade of cold “guest post” emails all websites seem to get.  No “trick” or “funnel” is going to get me to write a post about something that interests only the person who gets paid to promote it.
> It’s important to clarify at first: I’ve personally typed and carefully went through every single email I sent. Talk about scalable, huh?
She goes on to suggest a number of things that involve research and effort that puts a natural limit on how many she can send.
If "spammers" were to follow this advice and take the time to research me and my business, follow me on social media, and then type up an individualised e-mail to my business account, spam would not be a huge problem.
In part because I have a lower threshold for what I consider acceptable to send to my business account, and partly because if they invest that much effort in each e-mail, the volume would drop far down.
(UK law here, implementing EC directive)
> a person shall neither transmit, nor instigate the transmission of, unsolicited communications for the purposes of direct marketing by means of electronic mail unless the recipient of the electronic mail has previously notified the sender that he consents for the time being to such communications being sent by, or at the instigation of, the sender.
It's unlikely anyone would bother with someone who sent 600 emails, especially if she agrees not to send any more to an individual that complains to her.
Edit: bprieto's point about individuals vs businesses is very relevant -- the emails were sent to marketing companies, so they aren't spam under this directive.
I think if this is true then it's really not spamming. At least if someone was to do proper research and mail me without being too salesy (e.g. not including a link) then I would be okay with it.
Spamming is more like mailing a hundred people without trying to communicate just trying to make people click a link.
Spam or spam = unsolicited emails
So this analogy :/
Maybe sponsoring a mailing list would be less invasive and you can target people that are ok with getting info about that product.