Email - Html vs. Text - Statistics?

Allen,

Not statistics per se, but some pointers from
Aweber on how to improve html email effectiveness...
HTML Emails: How To Use Images Effectively

Brian

I design and send out probably close to 3000 emails a week in multiple campaigns through constant contact.

I have learned to never put critical information in images including website urls, contact info, or the main points of the email. When I did put this info in images I would get a ton of replies asking what the email was about. Using basic HTML and simple images I don't get nearly the replies, if any.

Just my .02

Allen,

There was a Mark Hendricks email course I bought either last yr or the yr before (one of his upsells for the 12 days xmas deal) and I recall HTML being discussed.

The thing that stands out in my memory was that HTML was not the way to go.

This probably doesn't help much, but maybe someone will remember the course and be able to fill in if it discussed any stats as well. It is on my old computer so I cannot access to check for you.

Aaron

HTML is very important from an open rate tracking perspective. Currently, using HTML, is the only way to track weather a message is opened or not. Link clicking is a different story.

As blur mentioned, most important thing is to NOT put any important information in the images itself.

Another tip is to put a link to a browser view of the email as the very 1st line in the message. This way, if the message is all messed up in the target email application, the 1st thing the user sees is a link to view the message in their browser.

As for the actual question on % that CAN view it... I have not seen any reliable stats on this. With all the different applications, operating systems, and browser based email, I think it would be VERY difficult to get any reliable numbers on this.

Allen, our subscribers love html emails! We offer them the choice when they sign up of either html or text. If they forget to choose then they are sent BOTH! In the html emails at the very top there is text that says, "If you are having problems viewing this email view it online." That link is clickable and then show the html email when they click on it.

From a personal standpoint, I'd much rather get an html email then a text one, it holds my attention longer and I actually READ them!

chuck

You'll hear it both ways, depending on who you talk to.

For me, text seems to work better. Got a free video in the YouTube link at the left that explains why.

One thing to remember, if you are sending to AOL users, links and images are turned off by default. This is for the users' protection, as it stops a lot of BS.

Be sure to remind AOL users to click "Show images and enable links". Any other email services use something similar?

In my own tests, text emails seemed to slightly outperform html when both visually looked identical.
Also, when sending out the email in both text and html (and letting the email client decide which to display), and using different tracking links for each version, I got more clicks on the text version.

Allen,


Last time I tested on a squeeze page I provided
a radio button that asked the subscribers to
choose between plain text and HTML. I can't
remember the exact figure but it was around 2/3
who chose plain text.

If you know anyone at ETR, I'd ask them as I know
they do a lot of tracking and they definitely use HTML.

Sherpa would also be a good place to get accurate
and up to date stats.

John