Saw this amusing Google+ post yesterday:<\/p>\n
Email marketer +Ben Settle is known for sending messages to his list every day. He argues that if you are giving good content then people won’t be annoyed.<\/strong><\/p>\n
A new study by Mailchimp disagrees. A frequency of your campaigns increase, engagement tends to decrease.<\/strong><\/p>\n
The exception – daily emails about a short term event, like a presidential campaign.<\/strong><\/p>\n
The takeaway here is simple. Run for political office and you’ll have an excuse for increasing…<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Funny stuff.<\/p>\n
Not sure who Mailchimp is talking about.<\/p>\n
But it sure as hellz ain’t talking about guys like me. (Sales have nearly doubled since this time last year.) Or my “Email Players” subscribers. (Just yesterday I quoted a subscriber doing my 30-day challenge — which requires daily emails — who made more sales in March than in January and February combined.) Or all the other smart marketers who have long known daily is best. (Right now, for example, I’m working on the June “Email Players” newsletter — and I’m analyzing a wine maker who nabs $30 MILLION per year sending *multiple* daily emails to his list — and sells ONLY with email.)<\/p>\n
But, like I keep saying:<\/p>\n
All these chumps believing “less email is better” is good.<\/strong><\/p>\n
It means (if you do it right) you’ll have zero competition.<\/p>\n
While your little mush cookie competitors are blindly following studies and only sending out one email per week or whatever, you can kick some gluteus assimus.<\/p>\n
But, you have to do it right.<\/p>\n
Otherwise Mailchimp is correct:<\/p>\n
People will ignore you.<\/p>\n
That’s where my “Email Players” newsletter can help.<\/p>\n
My system calls for daily emails.<\/p>\n
But, it’s simple.<\/p>\n
And fun.<\/p>\n
And, yes, profitable.<\/p>\n
Here’s where to subscribe:<\/p>\n