SMS Texting vs. SMTP Texting - Which is better?

11 replies
There has been alot of talk here lately on other threads how regular SMS texting, which uses shortcodes and goes directly through the carriers using the SMPP protocol, is far superior to the cheaper SMTP alternative, where texts are basically sent as an email through the texting service to the carrier.

However, the huge benefit of SMTP texting is that it is FAR CHEAPER than the traditional SMS direct texting service carrier to carrier. It is not uncommon to see unlimited pricing plans using SMTP texting service of $30, and so on, as compared with SMS direct texting services which charge per message - so 1000 sent text messages may cost 5 - 10 cents each depending on the provider (wholesale cost seems to be about 2 cents) and can add up very quickly.

Some of the problems with SMTP texting (according to the SMS direct shortcode texting companies):

1) SMTP texting is not time sensitve and can be delayed or take hours, since it is basically an email

2) SMTP texting can have ugly headers that look unprofessional when arriving to a customer

3) Carriers can block SMTP texting (especailly if it is commercial in nature) and only about 50% of SMTP texts are actually delivered

4) SMTP texting violates section 14(b)(1) of the CAN-SPAM act and as a result opens you and your customers up to serious fines and penalties

However, the advantage of SMTP texting services seems to be:

1) HUGE price advantage (much cheaper costs, unlimited plans, ability for agents to mark it up significantly, ability to charge per message when your per message costs are zero, etc.)

There is one other difference that I found that one can see as an advantage or disadvantage depending on your perspective. SMS direct messaging uses shortcodes, while SMTP messaging uses regular phone numbers. There is pro and con to this but with regular phone number you are not sharing the short code with others so you can get just about any keywords you want. You can also use a number in your local area. However the number is longer (7 or 10 digits instead of 5 or 6 for the shortcode).

As far as I can see, here is how I would answer the objections against SMTP:

1) Delayed texts - I doubt this is a huge problem. After all, most of the time I get 99% of my email instantly (well within a minute or two) of someone sending it. Since SMTP texting uses the same protocol as email I don't see why it would be any different.

2) Ugly headers - I have not seen this in my limited testing

3) Only 50% of smtp texts get delivered - I doubt this claim as those making it have not show any proof. I heavily use an iphone smtp texting app and have only one time with one text had a delivery problem (actually it was a delay) but it still made it...

4) Can Spam act. If you look up the actual can spam act at CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 and read section 14(b) those rules apply to ANY wireless commercial communication - that means the same rules apply to direct SMS texting or the cheaper SMTP texting. There is nothing here that says SMTP texting violates can spam - that is the technical means of delivery which the can spam doesn't care about. All can spam cares about is that if you deliver a message to a wireless device that you follow the rules - only send text to those that sign up, allow subscribers to stop the texts at anytime, etc. It doesn't appear that SMTP texting by nature of it's protocol violates the can spam act any more than an unsolicited commercial sms text could.

5) Lastly it seems that the objections against SMTP texting services are all coming from the SMS direct, shortcode services that use the carriers. They obviously have a vested financial interest in not seeing these ultra low cost providers appear as competitors, so you have to take the objections and what they say with a grain of salt.

SO WHICH IS BETTER?

Like many of you here, price is a huge determining factor on which service I choose (I am still looking for which one to offer my customers). But I want to pick the right one.

I would like to know does anyone here have experience with SMTP texting services, pro or con? Please be honest here.

Do you find your customers are only getting a 50% delivery rate? If so, that is a good reason NOT to use SMTP type texting, if for no other reason.

Or do you see ugly headers, or are texts delayed?

Please share your real world experiences here with others.
#smpp #sms #smtp #texting
  • Profile picture of the author BerkleyStreet
    I'm looking for the same information. Thought I was all set using the SMTP system until I started reading posts that have come up in review of a recent WSO. Initially cost was the issue for me. But I know that I can pass that on - so cost may still be an issue to some of the small businesses in my local area. I probably should have realized that there would be several "cons" since it seemed so cheap and easy lol.
    The thing that "sold" me as compared to the SMS system relates to numbers and keywords. I had planned to give each of my clients their own number (7 digit phone) and unlimited keywords. Try doing that with the shared short code system. All of the most requested keywords are all bought up.

    Here's the article from the other thread that has got me waiting:
    SMTP vs SMPP
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3591753].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BerkleyStreet
      I forgot to mention that one of the downsides of the SMTP system is in the bulk delivery system. You can't blast the whole list at once. Instead, it delivers the messages in sequence one after the other until done. This may or may not be a huge issue depending on what the message is.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3591783].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kml
    I'm in the process of researching of vendors too - preferably white label. Based on what the OP has said it seems to make sense for a number of reasons to go SMS and sell these reason for why it's a higher cost. I'd much rather not have any phone calls saying the text didn't go out due to SMTP - plus that instant gratification of someone getting an instant discount (say they had a 20% off coupon) can be pretty compelling.

    I'm not too concerned about using a shared number and I think one customer (thinking mostly retail) could easily get away with just one keyword (i.e. business name) and the text would contain the offer/info.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3616272].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author flowbee77
    Hello Matrix,
    I would stay away from ESMTP (smtp) mailing. Sure it is less expensive but most carriers (if not all) will mark it as spam and it will not get delivered. Stick with SMS and find the lowest priced one you an find.

    Eduardo
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3618548].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author virginiad
      I use an SMS service which charges per text but allows unlimited keywords. The SMTP services I have researched allow unlimited texts but only allow one keyword per account.

      The ability to use unlimited keywords gives a lot of flexibility to what you offer.

      The client can run multiple campaigns (ie a restaurant can have a list of bar patrons and a separate list of dinner patrons) which will allow for better targeting of the text broadcasts.

      Different keywords can be used for different advertising campaigns, and the client can track the effectiveness of each campaign.

      A car dealer can use a different keyword for each car, so respondents can be segregated accordeing to which car they called about.

      Same for a realtor.

      This makes SMS a more flexible alternative. For most businesses, I think that the ROI ( which can be 10 to 1 or higher) justifies the cost of the texts.

      Virginia
      Signature

      Virginia Drew


      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3619275].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author John Sullivan
        Originally Posted by virginiad View Post

        I use an SMS service which charges per text but allows unlimited keywords. The SMTP services I have researched allow unlimited texts but only allow one keyword per account.

        The ability to use unlimited keywords gives a lot of flexibility to what you offer.

        The client can run multiple campaigns (ie a restaurant can have a list of bar patrons and a separate list of dinner patrons) which will allow for better targeting of the text broadcasts.

        Different keywords can be used for different advertising campaigns, and the client can track the effectiveness of each campaign.

        A car dealer can use a different keyword for each car, so respondents can be segregated accordeing to which car they called about.

        Same for a realtor.

        This makes SMS a more flexible alternative. For most businesses, I think that the ROI ( which can be 10 to 1 or higher) justifies the cost of the texts.

        Virginia
        Hi Virginia,

        Would you mind sharing the sms company you are using?

        Thanks

        John
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3619440].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author virginiad
          Hi,

          I am using the company run by Jack Mize, but they have closed their mobile offering to new people.

          I could offer to let other marketers go through my account, because it is white label. The only thing is that they would not really be able to let their clients have access to their accounts.

          If anyone is interested in trying something out, send me a PM.

          I don't know anywhere else that allows unlimited keywords like they do. It seems like the packages offered by other companies are very expensive. I am not sure why other companies limit the keywords, because I am fairly sure that they get them for free.

          Right now, they are only in the US. They are close to getting Canada, but other countries are a way off.



          Virginia
          Signature

          Virginia Drew


          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3620585].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author criniit
            Originally Posted by virginiad View Post

            Hi,

            I am using the company run by Jack Mize, but they have closed their mobile offering to new people.

            I could offer to let other marketers go through my account, because it is white label. The only thing is that they would not really be able to let their clients have access to their accounts.

            If anyone is interested in trying something out, send me a PM.

            I don't know anywhere else that allows unlimited keywords like they do. It seems like the packages offered by other companies are very expensive. I am not sure why other companies limit the keywords, because I am fairly sure that they get them for free.

            Right now, they are only in the US. They are close to getting Canada, but other countries are a way off.



            Virginia
            My whitelabel service can offer unlimited keywords, pm me or email me at stevie.brodsky at gmail dot com for more info.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3708833].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author FullExMedia
              Even though the price for SMTP is compelling. They are not to be used for commercial means and many don't allow for the easy opt out that is required by Can Spam Act.

              SMS is reasonably priced and as competition in the market continues they are continually falling. White label prices can be as low as 2.9 cents.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4229966].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TrumpiaTim
              The carriers that support such gateways do so with the intent that they are not utilized for any commercial traffic. To that end, carriers actively monitor and filter against these connections to protect subscribers from unsolicited messages (spam) and utilize a variety of mechanisms to do so, including spam keyword filters, throttling against questionable domain or IP addresses suspected of abuse, and the like.
              This should answer your question.
              Signature

              www.Trumpia.com

              Trumpia: The Most Completed SMS Text Messaging Software & API Solution.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4238520].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author frontrunner1
    Originally Posted by matrixman View Post

    There has been alot of talk here lately on other threads how regular SMS texting, which uses shortcodes and goes directly through the carriers using the SMPP protocol, is far superior to the cheaper SMTP alternative, where texts are basically sent as an email through the texting service to the carrier.

    However, the huge benefit of SMTP texting is that it is FAR CHEAPER than the traditional SMS direct texting service carrier to carrier. It is not uncommon to see unlimited pricing plans using SMTP texting service of $30, and so on, as compared with SMS direct texting services which charge per message - so 1000 sent text messages may cost 5 - 10 cents each depending on the provider (wholesale cost seems to be about 2 cents) and can add up very quickly.

    Some of the problems with SMTP texting (according to the SMS direct shortcode texting companies):

    1) SMTP texting is not time sensitve and can be delayed or take hours, since it is basically an email

    2) SMTP texting can have ugly headers that look unprofessional when arriving to a customer

    3) Carriers can block SMTP texting (especailly if it is commercial in nature) and only about 50% of SMTP texts are actually delivered

    4) SMTP texting violates section 14(b)(1) of the CAN-SPAM act and as a result opens you and your customers up to serious fines and penalties

    However, the advantage of SMTP texting services seems to be:

    1) HUGE price advantage (much cheaper costs, unlimited plans, ability for agents to mark it up significantly, ability to charge per message when your per message costs are zero, etc.)

    There is one other difference that I found that one can see as an advantage or disadvantage depending on your perspective. SMS direct messaging uses shortcodes, while SMTP messaging uses regular phone numbers. There is pro and con to this but with regular phone number you are not sharing the short code with others so you can get just about any keywords you want. You can also use a number in your local area. However the number is longer (7 or 10 digits instead of 5 or 6 for the shortcode).

    As far as I can see, here is how I would answer the objections against SMTP:

    1) Delayed texts - I doubt this is a huge problem. After all, most of the time I get 99% of my email instantly (well within a minute or two) of someone sending it. Since SMTP texting uses the same protocol as email I don't see why it would be any different.

    2) Ugly headers - I have not seen this in my limited testing

    3) Only 50% of smtp texts get delivered - I doubt this claim as those making it have not show any proof. I heavily use an iphone smtp texting app and have only one time with one text had a delivery problem (actually it was a delay) but it still made it...

    4) Can Spam act. If you look up the actual can spam act at CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 and read section 14(b) those rules apply to ANY wireless commercial communication - that means the same rules apply to direct SMS texting or the cheaper SMTP texting. There is nothing here that says SMTP texting violates can spam - that is the technical means of delivery which the can spam doesn't care about. All can spam cares about is that if you deliver a message to a wireless device that you follow the rules - only send text to those that sign up, allow subscribers to stop the texts at anytime, etc. It doesn't appear that SMTP texting by nature of it's protocol violates the can spam act any more than an unsolicited commercial sms text could.

    5) Lastly it seems that the objections against SMTP texting services are all coming from the SMS direct, shortcode services that use the carriers. They obviously have a vested financial interest in not seeing these ultra low cost providers appear as competitors, so you have to take the objections and what they say with a grain of salt.

    SO WHICH IS BETTER?

    Like many of you here, price is a huge determining factor on which service I choose (I am still looking for which one to offer my customers). But I want to pick the right one.

    I would like to know does anyone here have experience with SMTP texting services, pro or con? Please be honest here.

    Do you find your customers are only getting a 50% delivery rate? If so, that is a good reason NOT to use SMTP type texting, if for no other reason.

    Or do you see ugly headers, or are texts delayed?

    Please share your real world experiences here with others.
    From the Mobile Marketing Association's Consumer Best Practices Guidelines:

    Carriers, at their discretion, make available SMTP gateways so that subscribers may receive SMS messages originated via email. Example: A mobile subscriber can be reached by sending an email (SMTP) message to [10 digit number]@[carrierdomainname].com.

    The carriers that support such gateways do so with the intent that they are not utilized for any commercial traffic. To that end, carriers actively monitor and filter against these connections to protect subscribers from unsolicited messages (spam) and utilize a variety of mechanisms to do so, including spam keyword filters, throttling against questionable domain or IP addresses suspected of abuse, and the like.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3708819].message }}

Trending Topics