Comments on: Conversion Alert: Invisibility Ray Hurts Email Open Rates and Click-through Rates http://conversionscientist.com/converting-with-email/conversion-alert-invisibility-ray-hurts-email-open-rates-and-click-through-rates/ More leads. More sales. Same traffic. Tue, 15 May 2012 14:21:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Brian Massey http://conversionscientist.com/converting-with-email/conversion-alert-invisibility-ray-hurts-email-open-rates-and-click-through-rates/comment-page-1/#comment-1324 Brian Massey Tue, 10 May 2011 04:56:00 +0000 http://conversionscientist.com/?p=335#comment-1324 Glenn, you should be suspicious of anything a "expert" claims. It's a healthy way to go about things. However, I was having a bit of fun with this. We didn't have anything to do with the email clients' decision to block images nor in how they turn them on. You missed the joke, but I'm sure you're not the only one. The bottom line is that using too many images in your emails makes them invisible to readers. Many readers will not click to view them. So, don't rely on big graphic-based emails. Thanks for your comment. Brian Glenn, you should be suspicious of anything a “expert” claims. It’s a healthy way to go about things.

However, I was having a bit of fun with this. We didn’t have anything to do with the email clients’ decision to block images nor in how they turn them on. You missed the joke, but I’m sure you’re not the only one.

The bottom line is that using too many images in your emails makes them invisible to readers. Many readers will not click to view them. So, don’t rely on big graphic-based emails.

Thanks for your comment.

Brian

]]> By: Glenn Friesen http://conversionscientist.com/converting-with-email/conversion-alert-invisibility-ray-hurts-email-open-rates-and-click-through-rates/comment-page-1/#comment-1323 Glenn Friesen Wed, 04 May 2011 21:51:00 +0000 http://conversionscientist.com/?p=335#comment-1323 I'm very suspicious of the credit you're taking when you say "Conversion Sciences has worked with the major email clients to develop a “de-cloaking” technology. For example, recipients can restore the email by clicking “Display Images below” in Gmail, or “Click here to download pictures” in Outlook." I'm pretty sure that in fact, most technologies block images (because they can be used for malicious purposes, including tracking email opens). These options to stop the blocking of images aren't "de-cloaking technologies" at all, but rather are the removal of the filters that prevent images from loading. At least that's what I've been led to believe by everyone else and logic. Perhaps I just don't get the joke? I’m very suspicious of the credit you’re taking when you say “Conversion Sciences has worked with the major email clients to develop a “de-cloaking” technology. For example, recipients can restore the email by clicking “Display Images below” in Gmail, or “Click here to download pictures” in Outlook.”

I’m pretty sure that in fact, most technologies block images (because they can be used for malicious purposes, including tracking email opens). These options to stop the blocking of images aren’t “de-cloaking technologies” at all, but rather are the removal of the filters that prevent images from loading. At least that’s what I’ve been led to believe by everyone else and logic.

Perhaps I just don’t get the joke?

]]>