My mailing list is an amazing resource that I look forward
to building into a multi-prong tool. The goal would be to deliver different
types of value to those who most desire it. In October I tried out that approach
but haven't found a good way to separate this. (Several of the "potential
paths" that would have led to segments in my mailing list had few people
click on them.) However, I took a few moments and built a summation of how my
mailing list is doing since I revived it this year.
Here is the five-month summation of my list: It is currently
growing by about 4.8% per month (after uninterested are removed). These are
more actively engaged (the typical author mailing list has 40% open, 10% click.
We have 50% open, 15% click) which means 1.5x better results than typical
author. [So that 4.8% growth is really 7.2% growth]
On the flip side, I was curious how my growth (with brutal
removals of inactive users) compares to more relaxed removal of inactive users.
In other words, if I wasn't so quick to remove people, would my reach be
better? The answer is yes, I would almost get twice the amount of interaction
if I gave people more of a chance. I would see about 15% growth, instead of the
[4.8% (actual) x 1.5 (highly engaged)] = 7.2% growth. That's a bit surprising
to me, as I assumed more engaged people would make up the difference.
When I revived my list, I was worried I would hit the 2k
MailChimp cap by end of October. With this current trajectory of 4.8% growth, I
should hit that during spring instead (April/May). However, as I try new
approaches in promotions, that may change. The wonderful thing about being active
in this endeavor is how much I learn. Perhaps this month or next I'll learn of
a new place that will double my growth? Maybe I'll find a great method to segregate
my mailing list, which causes it to grow?
