email list has 5k people, i sometimes send newsletters but open rate is 8%. what's the roi on this? compared to google traffic / social media, is email marketing a waste of money?
is an 8% open rate for email campaigns good or bad? how can i increase it? also should i make direct sales offers in emails, or provide value first and then sell?
email marketing roi champion: higher roi than paid marketing (email + seo > ads). 8% open rate is average (industry is 14-20%), improvement is possible.
increasing open rate: 1) optimize subject line (personal, urgent, curiosity). 2) send time (when your visitors are active). 3) segmentation (not to the whole list, but by persona). 4) a/b test.
email strategy: 30% value (tips, education), 70% not sales, do 50-50. so 3 value emails, 1 sales email alternating. direct sales emails cause ignore/unsubscribe.
email roi = lifetime value. if a customer stays on the email list for 2-3 years, they can make 10-20 sales total. traffic from email alone seems low but it controls the customer journey.
email sequence: welcome (subscriber welcome) > education series (3-5 emails, provide value) > nurture (weekly tips) > promotion (sales). automate this sequence (automation workflow).
i initially ignored our email list and i mean then when i started segmentation + value-focused content, open rate went to 12% click rate to 3.5%. every month, 30-40 sales come from an average of 100 emails — this is more consistent than google traffic.
don't underestimate email marketing, if you optimize it it's gold.
Email automation: use an email marketing tool, platforms like ConvertKit or ActiveCampaign. Triggers: new subscriber > welcome series, abandoned cart > reminder email, purchase > thank you + upsell.
email marketing gives great roi then but you gotta write good subject lines. avg is %8 but u can hit %15 with testing. dont just send sales emails, do a 50-50 mix of value + sales.
Email: 'open rate is %8, am i wasting money?' Google: traffic comes but no entry into my list, Email: my list is mine. like 3 years down the line Email might be outperforming all other sources.
I don't think this advice fits everyone. Internal linking is the cheapest and most neglected task.
A page that answers one question works better than one touching on five topics. If I were you, I'd go this route.
Let me speak from the other side; I'm on the supplier side. If you get three different answers on a topic, the question was asked wrong.
The real issue isn't the number, but what it's based on. I'm also curious if anyone does it differently.
this approach has a cost whhich isnt discussed but the real issue isnt the number, but what its based on.
most time waste accumulattes in tasks waiting for approval.
Yes, thats exactly how it is with email marketing. I mean ranking is the result, search intent is the input... Look at intent first.
When we decide without measuring we always end up in the same place.
I'd appreciate it if you shared the outcome. The real issue isn't the number, but what it's based on.
Everything goes well for the first three months; problems arise in the fourth. If I were you, I'd go this route.
Exactly like that. When we decide without measuring we always end up in the same place.
This is my opinion, I'm not claiming it's absolute truth.
Let me share my experience. If you don't write this down from the start, it leads to arguments later.
Updating an existing page yields faster results than creating a new one. Just leaving this note, it might be useful.
I've been dealing with this for a long time. Hasty decisions become decisions you have to fix six months later.
That's all, sorry if I went on too long.
i agree with this. ranking is the result, search intent is the input. anyway look at intent first.
if I were you Id go this route.