Sending of Newsletters Changed?

  • 0
  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • Answered
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members.

Hey Emma,

I just got the automated response from my Sunday mailing and I was surprised to see only 9% opens - we typically see 14-15%  Normally I would not worry too much, but I got a number of reports from Gmail customers that they did not get this week's newsletter or that the mailing is now hitting their spam box - something it never did before.

Did something change on your side to keep email providers from delivering/accepting our mailings?

Thanks,
Alysa
Photo of Bud Werner Memorial Library

Bud Werner Memorial Library

  • 25 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 5 years ago

  • 0
  • 1
Photo of Adriane Smith

Adriane Smith, Customer Support Specialist

  • 506 Posts
  • 53 Reply Likes
Hi Alysa,

I'm happy to help with this! Nothing has changed on Emma's end for delivering mailings. Once a server indicates they have accepted a mailing, we actually don't have any control over which inbox that server delivers the mailing to. We've definitely seen where Gmail has delivered mailings to the wrong folder before. Gmail now has several tabs, and since we aren't able to control where exactly they place the mailing once the server marks it as "delivered", there are a couple of ways Gmail recipients can better ensure delivery to their primary inbox.

First, advise your contacts to add your sender address to their contacts within their Gmail account. This lets the server know they do indeed, want to hear from you and can help to ensure the mailings go to their primary inbox. 

Secondly, have those recipients check their other 'tabs' within Gmail and if they find mailings in the spam folder, or the 'promotions' tab for another example, have them drag the mailing over to the primary inbox. Usually, that will trigger future deliveries to that primary inbox.

Finally, it's always good to follow these tips when creating a mailing to best avoid spam filters! 

I hope this helps Alysa! Please let me know if you have any questions :)
Photo of Bud Werner Memorial Library

Bud Werner Memorial Library

  • 25 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Hey Adrienne,

One of the things we had not done was to set up SPF records.  I don't have a "Jimmy" - you're looking at her - and I do DNS work by the seat of my pants. Totally self-taught.

Having said that I followed these instructions and though I think I got it right, I'd like to verify that you are asking us to create two host entries.

One that starts with spf2.0/pra a mx .... and another that starts with v=spf1 a mx ....

I didn't get any errors from Namecheap.  I should say that I will also follow-up with them.

Thanks for the help.

Cheers,
Alysa
Photo of Adriane Smith

Adriane Smith, Customer Support Specialist

  • 506 Posts
  • 53 Reply Likes
Good Morning Alysa,

I'm no Jimmie, myself, but in looking at our documentation on SPF it seems you've included both entries instead of replacing part of the original one. I'm not completely sure here, but I'm referring to this part: 

Change the text in bold in your original SPF record:

"v=spf1 a mx include:e2ma.net -all"

to this instead:

"spf2.0/pra a mx include:e2ma.net -all"

I'm happy to check in with our Delivery Team and report back. I'll let you know what I find out! 



Photo of Bud Werner Memorial Library

Bud Werner Memorial Library

  • 25 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
After I posted this question I continued with a bit of Internet research and the consensus is that you need both because one is for SPF Records and the other is for Sender ID records.  My understanding is that different email providers use one type of record over the other so you need both.

Interestingly, the Sender ID records are supposedly obsolete and should not be used...but tell that to the email providers.  This ls where I got that information: http://www.openspf.org/SPF_vs_Sender_ID

Also, I found the wizard that you pointed me too to be extremely complicated and did not match your instructions: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/safety/content/technologies/senderid/wizard/

This alternate wizard: http://www.spfwizard.net/ was much easier to use and then this validation site http://www.kitterman.com/spf/validate.html was excellent for testing.

Hope this helps others who don't have a "Jimmy."

Cheers,
Alysa
Photo of Adriane Smith

Adriane Smith, Customer Support Specialist

  • 506 Posts
  • 53 Reply Likes
Hi Alysa,

Thanks for sharing this information. I did confirm with our Delivery Team that because there are two things going on, one record for SPF and another for SenderID, you do need two records. I'm glad you found some good tools to help yourself and other Community members!