> You're supposed to be making profits, not happiness for your marketing team.
These two things have a strong positive correlation. Marketing teams don't become happy just because you get a newsletter. They become happy because you engage with the brand and the brand makes more sales. Which in turn makes for more profits.
These two things have a strong positive correlation. Marketing teams don't become happy just because you get a newsletter. They become happy because you engage with the brand and the brand makes more sales. Which in turn makes for more profits.
Making people jump through hoops to stop the barrage of spam certainly means your users will be engaged. But it also means they'll be unhappy. Which in turn makes for fewer profits.
If that were true, businesses would notice and stop the behavior. The unfortunate fact is that spam works, reengagement marketing works, lots of things that are annoying work, for definitions of work that mean, "works for the business using the tactic".
That sort of shit works because the utility is being measured incorrectly. All those hoops to opt out really juice the engagement metrics but don't determine if someone is interested in using your product or flailing about trying to escape the clutches of unwanted spam.
Take for instance Western Digital. In order to provide feedback on their (lousy) customer support you have to opt into all sorts of marketing surveys. If nobody opts in, nobody's complaining and so everything must be fine, right?
These two things have a strong positive correlation. Marketing teams don't become happy just because you get a newsletter. They become happy because you engage with the brand and the brand makes more sales. Which in turn makes for more profits.