<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Open rates climbing, click rates dropping</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2009/04/open-rates-climbing-click-rates-dropping/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2009/04/open-rates-climbing-click-rates-dropping/</link>
	<description>Email, Delivery, Spam and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:06:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Béate Vervaecke</title>
		<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2009/04/open-rates-climbing-click-rates-dropping/comment-page-1/#comment-2191</link>
		<dc:creator>Béate Vervaecke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:36:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wordtothewise.com/?p=403#comment-2191</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m surprised by the higher open rates as well.

Is it because of services as Senderscore Certified and Goodmail?

Also, I&#039;ve noticed that live.com sometimes just renders images, even without any certification or being in the contact or safe sender list.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised by the higher open rates as well.</p>
<p>Is it because of services as Senderscore Certified and Goodmail?</p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;ve noticed that live.com sometimes just renders images, even without any certification or being in the contact or safe sender list.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: laura</title>
		<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2009/04/open-rates-climbing-click-rates-dropping/comment-page-1/#comment-2189</link>
		<dc:creator>laura</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:09:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wordtothewise.com/?p=403#comment-2189</guid>
		<description>The ISPs make it easy for users to enable images, and many users are used to hitting the &quot;display images&quot; or &quot;add to addressbook&quot; for mail from friends and family. I think, too, senders are setting themselves up for success in this area a little more than they used to. 2 years ago, most of my clients sent every email with a different From: address, or would randomly change the From: address. Senders are a lot better at being consistent and that can only help image rendering.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ISPs make it easy for users to enable images, and many users are used to hitting the &#8220;display images&#8221; or &#8220;add to addressbook&#8221; for mail from friends and family. I think, too, senders are setting themselves up for success in this area a little more than they used to. 2 years ago, most of my clients sent every email with a different From: address, or would randomly change the From: address. Senders are a lot better at being consistent and that can only help image rendering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2009/04/open-rates-climbing-click-rates-dropping/comment-page-1/#comment-2190</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:08:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.wordtothewise.com/?p=403#comment-2190</guid>
		<description>Laura,

Agree with you on the irrelevance of open rate as a metric.

What really peaks my curiosity in these numbers is how they contradict common thoughts on the impact of image blocking in most email clients. In today&#039;s environment, where images are most commonly turned off by default, I&#039;d expect a drop in click rate to correspond to a drop in open rate (because the open rate is so often inferred from click activity). This seems to counter that logic and makes me wonder -- are more people learning to change the setting to enable images by default?!?

R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laura,</p>
<p>Agree with you on the irrelevance of open rate as a metric.</p>
<p>What really peaks my curiosity in these numbers is how they contradict common thoughts on the impact of image blocking in most email clients. In today&#8217;s environment, where images are most commonly turned off by default, I&#8217;d expect a drop in click rate to correspond to a drop in open rate (because the open rate is so often inferred from click activity). This seems to counter that logic and makes me wonder &#8212; are more people learning to change the setting to enable images by default?!?</p>
<p>R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

