Single Opt-In Vs. Double Opt-In. A Real Controversy?
March 7th, 2010
From time to time, single opt-in vs. double opt-in controversy appears again and again.
“Single opt-in is the way to go”. “No way! Double opt-in is the way because … this and that”.
The truth is that each opt-in form has its own advantages and its own disadvantages.
Let’s see some of them …
Single opt-in advantage: the rate of conversion from prospect into subscriber is higher than in the double opt-in case. Therefore you will have more subscribers on your list and your profits may be higher.
Some disadvantages of single opt-in:
1) you can add to your mailing list people who actually never asked themselves to be on your mailing list, therefore your risk to be reported as spammer is higher.
2) you don’t know if a subscriber who just opted in actually receives your emails. Why? Here are two reasons:
2.1 The spam filters are not email marketers friends. When you use double opt-in, you know that at least your first email arrived at the right destination.
2.2 Sometimes people make mistakes (typos). In case that the email address doesn’t exist not all the time you will receive a bounce back email. If that mistyped email address exists, then you’ll be spamming someone again and again.
The result of the disadvantage # 2 is that you get more “useless” subscribers that are actually “numbers” instead of subscribers and potential readers.
And so on and so forth … Then …
Can someone actually say “This form of opt-in is better”?
As a matter of fact, the answer is NO, and that’s why the whole controversy.
The truth is that someone may only say, “This form of opt-in is better FOR ME”
Why is that?
Because on a case by case basis, you may see that a certain disadvantage for another person, it may not be a disadvantage for you.
For example, if you sell ad space in your newsletters, then you may not want to cheat your advertisers by adding to your list also “subscribers” who actually never receive your emails.
However, if you send only commercial emails that are for your own profit and you don’t sell ad space, then you may not worry about the fact that some subscribers never receive your emails.
Another example. Some marketers pay a monthly fee to a third party (like Aweber) and that fee is based on the number of subscribers. They may not like to pay also for “dead” subscribers. Others may not care about this cost or simply may not use such a third party,
so they don’t worry about this disadvantage.
Conclusion: single opt-in vs. double opt-in controversy is just an artificial controversy due to a wrong approach based on the wrong thinking “What is best for me it has to be best for you, no matter whether I know your goals or not.”
“Single opt-in is the way to go”. “No way! Double opt-in is the way because … this and that”.
The truth is that each opt-in form has its own advantages and its own disadvantages.
Let’s see some of them …
Single opt-in advantage: the rate of conversion from prospect into subscriber is higher than in the double opt-in case. Therefore you will have more subscribers on your list and your profits may be higher.
Some disadvantages of single opt-in:
1) you can add to your mailing list people who actually never asked themselves to be on your mailing list, therefore your risk to be reported as spammer is higher.
2) you don’t know if a subscriber who just opted in actually receives your emails. Why? Here are two reasons:
2.1 The spam filters are not email marketers friends. When you use double opt-in, you know that at least your first email arrived at the right destination.
2.2 Sometimes people make mistakes (typos). In case that the email address doesn’t exist not all the time you will receive a bounce back email. If that mistyped email address exists, then you’ll be spamming someone again and again.
The result of the disadvantage # 2 is that you get more “useless” subscribers that are actually “numbers” instead of subscribers and potential readers.
And so on and so forth … Then …
Can someone actually say “This form of opt-in is better”?
As a matter of fact, the answer is NO, and that’s why the whole controversy.
The truth is that someone may only say, “This form of opt-in is better FOR ME”
Why is that?
Because on a case by case basis, you may see that a certain disadvantage for another person, it may not be a disadvantage for you.
For example, if you sell ad space in your newsletters, then you may not want to cheat your advertisers by adding to your list also “subscribers” who actually never receive your emails.
However, if you send only commercial emails that are for your own profit and you don’t sell ad space, then you may not worry about the fact that some subscribers never receive your emails.
Another example. Some marketers pay a monthly fee to a third party (like Aweber) and that fee is based on the number of subscribers. They may not like to pay also for “dead” subscribers. Others may not care about this cost or simply may not use such a third party,
so they don’t worry about this disadvantage.
Conclusion: single opt-in vs. double opt-in controversy is just an artificial controversy due to a wrong approach based on the wrong thinking “What is best for me it has to be best for you, no matter whether I know your goals or not.”