Posts Tagged ‘Email alt tags’
Posted by Nic Winters on December 30th, 2009
Welcome again to The First 2 Weeks, where we analyze 3 competitors’ email marketing strategies when it is most crucial… the opt-in process, welcome message, and first few campaigns as these marketers attempt to establish relationships with subscribers.
In our last edition we evaluated the opt-in process and welcome messages for 3 competitors in the steakhouse restaurant chain segment: Lone Star Steakhouse, Outback Steakhouse, and Texas Roadhouse. In part 2 we will now investigate campaigns sent beyond the welcome email and preference editing options.
INITIAL CAMPAIGNS
Both Outback and Texas Roadhouse sent out additional campaigns beyond the welcome email within the first 2 weeks, but there was a vast difference in timing. Texas Roadhouse capitalized on the interest of a new subscriber by sending their welcome email relatively quick and then a second message within the next week. However, Outback (who didn’t send a welcome message) didn’t deploy their first message until day 14. Both competitors are much more aggressive than Lone Star, which didn’t send anything beyond the welcome message within the first 2 weeks – missing out on continuing to grow the solid foundation they established with their welcome offer.
Overall, I found myself fairly unimpressed by Outback’s email, as the design seemed to be missing a clear focal point. In addition to this fault, the message was comprised entirely of images. However, they did employ an interesting alt tag strategy, as the alternate text that displays with images off doesn’t entirely spell out what is contained within that image. Instead they used the 2 alt tags that display as part 1 and part 2 of a sentence that summarizes the overall focus of the message (“Summer is almost over…” and “but there is still time left to try our $9.95 Summer Adventures. Visit us tonight!”)
Texas Roadhouse took a similar approach to email design – all images. However, they utilized alt tags throughout to identify the contents of key items when images are disabled. They also utilized the information gathered during the opt-in process by pulling in your favorite location within the content and the from name along with pulling in your first name as well.
EMAIL PREFERENCE OPTIONS
Outback lacks any preference capabilities – only supplying an unsubscribe link. Lone Star goes just one step further by allowing the subscriber to update their email address on this well-branded webpage. However, they provide only an archaic unsubscribe capability, as their link is just a mail-to link that generates a draft message with no subject line… requiring you to email them to be removed.
Texas Roadhouse provides the most options for subscribers of these 3 competitors by far. They include an “Update your information” link at the base of all messages – taking you to a preferences page similar to that seen during opt-in that allows you to change not only the items you submitted in the past, but also fill in additional fields. They have take a great approach to collecting more optional information on this page, as those who are visiting have already indicated interest in updating settings. These additional fields include items such as how often you visit, marital status, if you have children, favorite time to visit, favorite menu item, and even an area where you can suggest events/offers you would be interested in. All of these items could lead to additional segmented messages with relevant content/offers.
Watch for our next edition in the coming weeks in which we will evaluate the campaigns of 3 new competitors!
Posted by Rob Ropars on November 30th, 2009
I received an email from smith+noble, a great purveyor of drapes, curtains and all things window covering. Several things jumped out immediately when I opened the email.
The first issue is that the entire email is image-only. Many spammers send all-image emails to avoid spam filters looking for specific words/phrases common to spam. Spam filters adapted to this move by looking at the balance of images-to-text in emails and the balance of text between the HTML and text-only versions. The fewer words you use, the greater the risk you will potentially be seen as a spammer. 
The second issue involves their use of alt tags or “alt text”. This simple coding addition allows HTML software, browsers and email clients, to show text if images don’t load. Not every email client supports alt tags, but it’s best to use them nonetheless for those that do. This is a great way to reinforce your message and what’s in the unloaded image. Intrigue me. Make me want to click the link to view that image. Although they did use alt tags, they used the SAME alt tag for each and every image (“smith+noble”): yeah I got it…you’re smith+noble. I felt like I was in a Twilight Zone episode were suddenly everything had changed to their name.
Posted by Rob Ropars on November 12th, 2009
I recently received an email from wine.com, and it was one of the best email marketing emails I’ve seen in some time. They managed to incorporate the vast majority of email marketing best practices, had a simple clean layout and detailed information about their products/offer.
The “from name” clearly identified the sender (“Wine.com”-though they seem to use “Wine.com” and “wine.com” interchangeably) and the subject line detailed the special offer and its limited-time availability, “2 days only – up to 30% off select Geyser Peak wines”.
Opening the email I saw one of the best “images off” layouts in a long time. No “all image” email here! Right from the top they get so many things refreshingly right.
They have preheader/snippet text, “Two phenomenal wines in limited supply” reinforcing the subject line and available for mobile devices and email snippet preview in the inbox. That is immediately followed by a link to a web copy and their white listing/safe sender info. The header area has a small logo with an alt tag so I can clearly see it’s from “Wine.com” and it’s not taking up a lot of preview pane real estate.
There are a few images to its right that are so small I can’t see what they are at least in Yahoo’s images off rendering and then a forward to a friend link for viral promotion. Right below that is a site navigation row with links (as text-awesome) to key parts of their site (“wine shop,” “fine wine,” etc.).
That’s always a great addition in case I want to look around your site and do/buy something else if the featured offer isn’t of interest. Right below that is an extra section with an intriguing pitch for free shipping for a full year followed by a personalized greeting (Dear Robert…”), and a summary of the offer with links to learn more about each wine featured.
All of the above should fit in most preview panes and provides everything I could want and know more. I cannot stress enough how utterly fantastic work that is all around! About the only thing I’m puzzled about is the two or three small images top center next to the forward, but that’s obviously something small and hopefully not critical.
Posted by Rob Ropars on October 19th, 2009
I received a great email from the National Wildlife Federation looking to arrange a symbolic “adoption” of endangered animals by buying a collection of stuffed animals as gifts for kids. At the same time you’re making a donation to a very worthy charity.
With a clear “From Name” (“National Wildlife Federation”) and an intriguing subject line (“Adopt an Animal Today”), I felt like this was my chance to get a glimpse into Brad and Angelina’s world. I too could be honorable and socially conscious by adopting! I opened the email and then saw some snippet text summarizing the message and consistent with the subject line, “National Wildlife: Protect America’s precious wildlife by adopting an animal today!”. Based on who they were, the subject line and the snippet text, I was encouraged to view images to see the message.
Overall the visual layout was clean and colorful and images crisp and enticing. However, as with so many emails I see, the image usage was just too much. Literally everything is an image from top to bottom.
They did do a lot of things correct, they included:
• Snippet text at the top which is useful for email clients that show the initial text in an email (and mobile devices that don’t display full HTML)
• A web link to an HTML copy of the message to view in a browser
• Alt tags behind the images
• A lot of great links to their site as a navigation row
• Their URL and a contact phone
• Typical email marketing/legal best practices (opt-out link, add to safe sender info, privacy policy link, postal address, etc.)
However, they could have had an even greater impact by using HTML text instead of embedding all the text of the email in images. Readers shouldn’t have to take action to see your message or take action.
Throughout the message, the text at the top right, the navigation links, the main message/call-to-action, the names of the collections and the extra gift section have multiple opportunities to utilize text. Why is that so valuable? If someone doesn’t enable images (and most email clients have them off by default), they would only be looking at snippet text and alt tags (and keep in mind that not every email client displays them). Do you really want to risk someone not being enticed to view images and see your message?
In addition, the call-to-action could very well be below the preview pane “fold” in addition to being an image. So it’s forcing people to scroll down and take extra actions instead of just having a link ready to click. Also the text of the links, including the navigation buttons and the “Adopt Now” button, should all be underlined to reinforce visually that they are in fact hyperlinks.
It’s a good email supporting a great cause. However, the email marketing worker bee that I am just wants to reach out and grab the message and redo it so it really maximizes their efforts. With very small reworking, this email could look nearly identical with images on/off and ensure the maximum number of people view (and hopefully take) the desired action.
Being all image and low text content, they also increase the risk of spam filtering as it might look like this email was designed to avoid “word/phrase” filters. In addition, the balance between the HTML and text-only versions won’t be possible since there’s almost no text in the HTML version (something else that looks spammy to filters).
Hopefully someone at NWF will appreciate my humble words of advice and certainly with a full COMPASS report by our team, they (or anyone else) could have a full review of an email with extensive analysis of all the various components of an email. Given the cause and their heart being in the right place, I’m going to go ahead and order one of the collections…for my nephews… no really for my nephews.
