More Double Opt-In Nonsense

I’ve stopped listening to what experts say and simply look at what successful people do.

There’s often a huge difference.

Especially about how to grow a business.

The longer I do this, the more I realize that no one knows the exact path to get where they want to go. Unless you can see into the future, then you’re pretty much in the same boat as everyone else.

Sure, experience can help you make smart choices, but as for a guarantee that what you’ve done will help you succeed in what you’re about to do… there just doesn’t seem to be a guarantee for that. At least I haven’t found it yet.

Success comes down to how you row the boat and the decisions and mistakes you make along the way.

But most importantly, success comes down to the simple decision that, no matter what, you keep rowing your boat.

I’ve been working with some very large (and growing) mailing lists lately. And when you’re dealing with big numbers, it’s a whole lot easier to spot trends. When things work, they can work in a big way. When they don’t work, well, the results can be just as stunning… but depressing.

Here’s something I’ve realized:

Double Opt-In is a HUGE Money Waster

Double opt-in, double opt-in… it’s the standard for ethical email marketing. That’s what I’ve heard all my life.

You hear it from a lot of “experts,” and you hear it from a lot of third party autoresponder/email services. If your business is “above board,” then you us double opt-in. You don’t want to be called a SPAMMER do you?

Turns out, all of this double opt-in junk seems to be a bunch of bull.

At least I think so.

The only email services that seem to require it, are those that have a lot to lose if their clients don’t use it.

Services that are sending email for thousands of businesses of all shapes and sizes.

With that many different types of business and personalities running those businesses, it’s easy to get quite a lot of “pee in the pool.” And one bad apple can make problems for the rest of the apples.

Or at least that’s the official explanation.

They’ll tell you double opt-in is for your own good. That you’ll have a cleaner list if you use double opt-in.

Shouldn’t that be my choice?

In an effort to get to the truth, I decided to stop listening and start looking. Looking at what the successful businesses were doing, not what the experts (or the status quo) was saying.

So I took a few minutes and took a snapshot of some of the bigger publishers and internet marketers to see if double opt-in or single opt-in would come out on top.

You might be surprised by the results:

Publisher/Marketer	Single or Double Opt-In
Agora Agora Inc. Including Daily Reckoning, Early to Rise	Single Opt-In
Boardroom Bottom Line Secrets	Single Opt-In
Weiss Money and Markets	Single Opt-In
Dr. Whitaker Healthy Directions	Single Opt-In
Perry Marshall PerryMarshall.com	Single Opt-In
Matt Furey MattFurey.com	Single Opt-In

Collectively, these businesses are responsible for generating a whole lot of revenue. It’s an assumption, but I believe they just might know what they’re doing.

Just imagine going to McDonalds and being asked… “Would you like fries with that?”

You say, “Yes…”

They say, “Are you sure you’d like fries with that?”

In my opinion, double opt-in is bad for your business. Who cares if it’s the “standard?” Doesn’t seem to be the standard for the successful businesses I’ve listed above. And there are a whole lot more that are on that list.

Don’t give in to the fear. That’s about the only reason you’ll get for using double opt-in.

Instead, make your own choices, find service providers that support them, and vote with your dollars.

John C. A. Manley

Thanks for your reply. I suspected FeedBurner didn't offer you a choice.

I took action on this though and switched over the blog signup at www.drcarolyndean.com to no-confirmation-needed. Just to see if there was any spike in signups. So far it does look higher.

I split-tested this with another list once and found 25% higher signup rate.

I have another client site I could test to see if it makes a differences in sales. I'll talk to that client about testing it and little you know the results. It's a basic mini-site with optin, email sequence and then sale page -- good place to test to see whether this only helps optin rates or if it actually helps signups.

In the end, it sounds like something everybody should test. Do a Google Optimizer test with a main sales page as the goal (e.g. not the thank-you for signing up page).

In a public email message, Dr. Andrew Jones said he tested this and found that it made no difference in his sales -- suggesting that anybody who can't click a confirmation link, can not also click a sales button.

There are advantages to the double optin though. I just agree with you and that the advantages (e.g. avoids people entering the wrong email address, avoids people signing up other people without permission so we get flagged for spam, and forces the recipient to add you to their safe) are outweighed by the disadvantages.

share flag

spam
offensive
disagree
off topic

leistermg

Hey John,

Good point about feedburner... If I was using an autoresponder service where I did regular mailings to a large list in order to get money, I'd be looking for a single optin system. Or at least one like infusion where I could get the double optin on my own terms.

I guess it doesn't bother me as much for ME since I'm not doing any mailings where I ask you for money. It's not my personal marketing method.

Hopefully, at some point, someone will create something new. Some better type of email confirmation that doesn't require all these steps.

Thanks for the update about Furey's list. I'm sure there's a good reason for it... but I still think it's not in the best interest of the customer experience :)

Thanks for the comment!

johnjohncamanleycom

I've often debated this myself and have done both. The double optin sure is a time waster also.

I've tracked it and seen a consistent 25% don't click the confirmation link.

Some argue if they can't click a link will they be able to click a order button?

For the record, Matt Furey switched to double optin with Aweber.

ronaldredito

Thank you for pointing this out. In my case, I use a double opt-in and if you are in the shoes of the visitor it's a waste of time. People are impatient this days.

johnfurst

Yeah,

it's time that an Internet marketer like Armand Morin finally starts
an email marketing service. A techie, lawyer, or any other kind of
bean counter certainly cannot run such an operation. They don't
understand! You pointed parts of it out.

I just noticed that AWeber obviously has changed and removed
a setting at least for some account types. They did this silently,
which is absolutely not ok in my opinion.

You could/can specify if a subscriber sees all subscriptions with the
same email address to lists in the same AWeber account on the
"change subscriber option/unsubscribe" page.

Now, they see all. And if they want to change one email address.
Cannot do it. They change all at once.

Of course a marketer could open and pay for different accounts
for each of their marketing tests. But how long will it take till
AWeber to show them all lists even people in the same household
have signed up to. (I mean that's exagerated, but AWeber moves
in that direction.)

The idea of having separate lists, measuring response, moving
subscribers to other lists (which is as you have laid out difficult
with AWeber to begin with) is to provide subscribers with
more relevant content for them.

AWeber just makes and continues to make it even more
difficult for marketers.

Slowly and surely I think those guys are not in the right
business.

They care more about getting people off a list
than they care about supporting marketers to keep
people happy who are already on their list.
BUT that's what pays their bill! They don't seem to
dig that.

Sad story. I really liked those guys a lot.

Now I have to re- think, if I still can ethically, recommend
AWeber as an affiliate. I am not sure anymore, it doesn't seem
that their clients' interest and satisfaction is their most important
agenda.

And I have started a project in my one of partner
organization ... we already got a dedicated server
for email purpose. Let's check that out.

At least Infusionsoft has started to make "no setup fee" offers
lately.

Thanks for your feedback.
Yours
John

Thanks for coming by.

Right now, for small business, I'm knee deep in Infusionsoft.com

Once you get into the systems the larger mailers use, (Lyris, etc.), then the rules aren't so strict and single optin isn't treated like the plague.

But they are expensive.

You can always go it alone with a mailing application hosted on your own server, but that gets you a new set of responsibilities to deal with.

I don't know of a PERFECT solution right now.

Makes sense. Each additional required click lets people get off your bus.

Any service providers you recommend to take a closer look at?

Breez Brander

Most have to abide by CAN SPAM laws and the ones hosted in the US are especially jumpy about these things as that law is basically a US specific law. Other countries have similar laws, some no laws. The problem is that major email account providers like Yahoo, Google, Live etc. give you a lot of hoops to jump through in order to ensure deliverability. My experience is that single optin does increase signups significantly, but it also produces a mountain of bounces. But at least bounces you can automatically clean out, subscribers you cannot ever get back. Me and a few pals are building a no nonsense responder system to cater to Aweber, Icontact etc. refugees. It's planned for www.swega.com domain.