4 ms·

You mean the awful marketing that led you to the product? That awful marketing? Is that the awful marketing you're referring to? I just want to clarify that th

You mean the awful marketing that led you to the product? That awful marketing? Is that the awful marketing you're referring to? I just want to clarify that the awful marketing you are speaking of is the one that caused you to look at the product...

001sky 14y ago
all publicity is good publicity ..except for when its not.
kstenerud 14y ago
Yes. The awful marketing that throws around obviously bogus numbers, leading me to wonder what else they'd do in a slipshod manner. So yeah, I looked at the page. Congrats and all that.
- pospischil 14y ago
  OP here -- the numbers are in no way bogus, all sourcing information and methodologies are listed on the page itself (see the bottom left * on each 'slide'). Would love to understand what gave you that impression, as we work hard to build content like this, and hate to see it shrugged off.
  - mattmanser 14y ago
    unsubscribing costs U.S. retailers about $5.8 billion per year Utter nonsense. /end thread
    - pacaro 14y ago
      The telling part is that they say... "Custora's research shows that stores on average lose roughly 1.75% of revenue every year due to unsubscribes." This is remarkably similar (in amount) to loss through shrinkage at bricks and mortar stores, which is estimated at 1.7% (according to one source I bothered to find) [1] - but while retailers take steps to reduce shrinkage, there is a cost/benefit balance in play and a certain amount is inevitable, maybe the same is true of unsubscribe I'm more curious about how that 1.75% compares from other sources of lost revenue; how does it compare to the cost of processing returns, or fraud, or just basic transaction costs, &c? Maybe it's significant, maybe it's noise, but without anything to compare it to, who knows [1] http://www.jrrobertssecurity.com/security-news/security-crime-news0024.htm http://www.jrrobertssecurity.com/security-news/security-crim...
      - rhizome 14y ago
        Maybe it's retconning loss figures to a model they already have. If they can fit online expectations to meatspace loss figures, then they don't have to change their models.
- squarecat 14y ago
  Hopefully, the hyperbole communicated the intent of a good-natured ribbing...

001sky 14y ago

all publicity is good publicity ..except for when its not.

kstenerud 14y ago

Yes. The awful marketing that throws around obviously bogus numbers, leading me to wonder what else they'd do in a slipshod manner. So yeah, I looked at the page. Congrats and all that.

pospischil 14y ago
OP here -- the numbers are in no way bogus, all sourcing information and methodologies are listed on the page itself (see the bottom left * on each 'slide'). Would love to understand what gave you that impression, as we work hard to build content like this, and hate to see it shrugged off.
- mattmanser 14y ago
  unsubscribing costs U.S. retailers about $5.8 billion per year Utter nonsense. /end thread
  - pacaro 14y ago
    The telling part is that they say... "Custora's research shows that stores on average lose roughly 1.75% of revenue every year due to unsubscribes." This is remarkably similar (in amount) to loss through shrinkage at bricks and mortar stores, which is estimated at 1.7% (according to one source I bothered to find) [1] - but while retailers take steps to reduce shrinkage, there is a cost/benefit balance in play and a certain amount is inevitable, maybe the same is true of unsubscribe I'm more curious about how that 1.75% compares from other sources of lost revenue; how does it compare to the cost of processing returns, or fraud, or just basic transaction costs, &c? Maybe it's significant, maybe it's noise, but without anything to compare it to, who knows [1] http://www.jrrobertssecurity.com/security-news/security-crime-news0024.htm http://www.jrrobertssecurity.com/security-news/security-crim...
    - rhizome 14y ago
      Maybe it's retconning loss figures to a model they already have. If they can fit online expectations to meatspace loss figures, then they don't have to change their models.
squarecat 14y ago
Hopefully, the hyperbole communicated the intent of a good-natured ribbing...