Email Evaluation Project

13
ESP Evaluation & RFI Project Scott Pierson

description

Project was an in-depth evaluation of hosted and on-premise email solution providers that included the writing of a 200-question RFI, RFP and a quantitative scoring and ranking matrix of the six finalists based on platform features, key emerging technologies and industry best practices in design, deliverability and interpretation of metrics. Included cost analysis of hosted vs. on-site solutions, integrating email with web behavior, developing email reputation to improve delivery rates, relevancy and persuasive content and the integration of customer preference centers.

Transcript of Email Evaluation Project

Page 1: Email Evaluation Project

ESP Evaluation &RFI Project

Scott Pierson

Page 2: Email Evaluation Project

Agenda Goals

Results

Success As ESP

Page 3: Email Evaluation Project

Initial Project Goals Build a quantifiable method to determine the

current best-in-class email campaign deployment and management tool that provides a robust user interface complete with delivery tracking, performance optimization, expanded reputation monitoring, dynamic content integration, custom personalization and world-class problem resolution support.

Find an ESP platform that integrates data from multiple sources within the email delivery platform to help clients build highly personalized, automated and relevant content.

Understand specifically what it takes to offer, deliver and support best-practices from an ESP

Page 4: Email Evaluation Project

Initial vendor demos Hosted ESPs:

− Admail, EmailLabs, Acxiom/Digital, Lyris/EmailLabs, ExactTarget, Responsys, Bronto, SilverPop, Gold Lasso, WhatCounts

On-premise: − StrongMail, MessageSystems/WhatCounts and

Zrinity.

Delivery, Deployment & Rendering Vendors: − Pivotal Veracity, ReturnPath, Habeas, Iconix

Additional demos:− Alterian

Page 5: Email Evaluation Project

In-depth evaluations

Hosted (ASP)− ExactTarget− SilverPop

On-Premise− StrongMail− WhatCounts (UI)

MessageSystems (MTA)

Two additions − One low-end – Gold Lasso

(eWay competitor)− One high-end –

ClickSquared (Multi-channel)

Page 6: Email Evaluation Project

Process On-sight demos – final four

RFI & RFP written

Responses to 203 questions evaluated

Five vendors responded

One vendor opted-out

Page 7: Email Evaluation Project

Questionnaire Pg 1/25Feature Value to LSC (0, 1, 2) Vendor Features

Vendor Grade (0, 1, 2, 3)

Weighted Grade

       

  Company information   8

       

1 How many active clients do you service? 2 2

1 How many active agency relationships do you have? 2 2

1 Average total monthly email volume of all clients? 3 3

1 How many employees do you have? 1 1

       

  Technical innovation   10

       

2 What major technical innovations are you most proud? 2 4

2What are your key differentiators or competitive advantages that distinguish you from your competitors? 3 6

       

  Campaign Management   66

       

1Can we monitor the progress of each campaign being deployed real time? 2 2

2How many users can have access to the UI at one time?

2 4

Page 8: Email Evaluation Project

ResultsVendor eWay ExactTarget SilverPOP WhatCounts Gold Lasso ClickSquared

             

Company information 4 12 6 8 4 6

Technical innovation 0 8 4 10 4 12

Campaign Management 47 57 52 66 62 62

List Management 17 20 15 19 19 18

Deliverability, Bounce and Reputation Management 58 76 77 114 83 82

Reporting and Analytics 58 65 67 62 64 60

Platform Integration and API Support 15 41 33 36 11 29

Pricing 37 29 29 66 86 29

Dynamic Content 14 22 26 34 20 28

Partner Program Support 47 60 41 64 58 58

Customer Service and Support

8 14 15 12 12 13

Miscellaneous Questions 15 21 16 29 26 27

             

Total 320 425 381 520 449 424

Page 9: Email Evaluation Project

Pricing Comparisons

eWay ExactTarget SilverPop WhatCounts Gold Lasso ClickSquared

PAYG Annual AnnualPAYG ASP toOn-premise PAYG PAYG

Vendor Score 320 425 381 520 449 424

Actual volume CPM on 15.1 mm

Value Quotient (score/cpm) 105 283 224 1333 440 154

Client Invoice

ESP cost

Monthly Revenue

GPM 17% 56% 50% 89% 70% 41%

Page 10: Email Evaluation Project

Recommendation

Strengths: − Six-month

introductory ASP period

− VQ 10x current− Technology

leadership− Pricing− Support− Incentive− Top industry

partnerships− ASP to on-premise

Page 11: Email Evaluation Project

Success as ESP

Leadership in best-practices

Vital distinction between Legitimacy and CAN SPAM

Non-conflicting branding

Correct fundamental sales/marketing message

Win-win corporate mind-set

Delight the customer, under-promise & over-deliver

Customers require research before purchase

Correct email policy framework

Page 12: Email Evaluation Project

One conflict . . .

Selling opt-in email lists, e-append services and ECOA services

ESPs must represent and enforce best practices

Does not include the loophole called opt-out

Pricing metrics unprofitable long-term− Must send below ISPs reputation monitoring radar at

1,500 per day = max per month 30,000− Generally poor ESP clients

High spam complaints, blacklistings, ISP blocks

Poor advice to help client develop good email “reputation”

Choose a world. Trouble to play in both.

Page 13: Email Evaluation Project

The End