Summary
The question of who bears the cost of spam and email delivery is complex, revealing that the burden extends far beyond the initial sender. While senders pay for the transit of emails up to the SMTP transaction, recipients, particularly mailbox providers, absorb significant costs associated with filtering, storage, and processing unwanted mail. This imbalance incentivizes spammers, who often operate with virtually zero sending costs by using stolen resources, pushing the financial and resource load onto others. Understanding this dynamic is crucial for both legitimate marketers striving for optimal email deliverability and for the industry at large trying to combat unsolicited mail.
Key findings
- Shared Burden: The cost of email delivery is not solely on the sender; recipients, including internet service providers (ISPs) and mailbox providers, incur substantial expenses for managing and filtering emails.
- Sender's Portion: Email senders primarily pay for the transmission of emails up to the point of the SMTP transaction. This includes fees to Email Service Providers (ESPs) or the maintenance of their own sending infrastructure.
- Recipient's Cost: Mailbox providers bear significant costs for processing, storing, and filtering incoming messages, especially spam, which consumes vast network resources. Abusix highlights that service providers absorb costs when spammers consume bandwidth by sending unsolicited emails.
- Spammer's Advantage: True spam, often originating from stolen or compromised resources, has virtually zero per-unit sending cost for the spammers themselves. This low barrier to entry makes bulk unsolicited email (or email blocklist) attractive.
- User Time and Resources: End-users also pay a cost in terms of their time spent deleting unwanted emails and the resources (internet connection, computer storage) consumed by spam.
Key considerations
- Economic Impact: Spam represents an external cost to the entire email ecosystem, impacting bandwidth, storage, processing power, and user productivity.
- Regulatory Landscape: Legislation like the CAN-SPAM Act aims to mitigate spam by setting rules for commercial emails, though enforcement and effectiveness vary.
- Anti-Spam Measures: Mailbox providers heavily invest in sophisticated spam filters, blocklists, and threat intelligence to protect users and their infrastructure.
- Sender Reputation: Maintaining a strong sender reputation is critical for legitimate senders to ensure their emails are delivered to the inbox and not mistaken for spam.
What email marketers say
Email marketers often navigate a challenging landscape where the desire for growth can sometimes clash with ethical and legal boundaries. Their discussions highlight the prevalence of services that promise quick list growth, but sometimes rely on questionable data acquisition methods. Many marketers express concern about the ethical implications of such services, emphasizing the importance of genuine opt-in consent and transparent practices to build sustainable and compliant email programs. The conversation also touches on the unique regulatory environment of political emailing and the perceived cost of dealing with unwanted mail from an end-user perspective.
Key opinions
- Consent Ambiguity: Marketers frequently encounter services that claim their data is opt-in, but the actual source and method of consent can be highly questionable, bordering on spam.
- Legal Grey Areas: Some businesses operate in perceived legal grey areas, often touting their compliance on their homepages, which can be a red flag for unethical practices.
- Political Email Exceptions: Political parties are often not subject to the same email privacy and unsubscribe legislation as commercial entities, leading to different expectations regarding consent and unwanted mail.
- Recipient's Minimal Cost: From a user perspective, the direct cost of deleting an unwanted email is minimal, making it seem less impactful than physical junk mail, despite the broader system costs.
- Data Monetization: There's a recognition that both legitimate services (like Google) and less legitimate data appending services monetize user data, albeit with significant differences in consent and transparency.
Key considerations
- Vigilance Against Deception: Marketers must be highly skeptical of vendors promising 'guaranteed opt-in' lists, as these often involve deceptive practices.
- Ethical Sourcing: Prioritize building lists through transparent and consent-based methods to maintain sender reputation and avoid blacklisting.
- Long-Term Deliverability: Engaging with unscrupulous data services can lead to severe deliverability problems, including reduced inbox placement and being placed on blocklists.
- User Experience: While users might easily delete emails, the accumulation of unwanted messages negatively impacts their experience and perception of email as a communication channel.
Marketer view
An Email Geeks marketer asks why there's a specific focus on conservative websites, stating that many types of websites use services for cookies and data appending, which are legal in most US states. This suggests a broader acceptance and use of such data practices across the web, regardless of political affiliation.
Marketer view
A Marketer from Email Geeks observes that the Jezebel article has a particular slant, and describes GetEmails as essentially a B2C append service. They note that many such services exist, but this specific one's marketing approach, centered on a founder story, is a model they find particularly unappealing, indicating a skepticism towards overly personal branding in potentially controversial business models.
What the experts say
Email deliverability experts offer a more nuanced and technical view on the costs of spam, largely focusing on where the burden truly lies within the email ecosystem. They highlight that while senders pay for the initial transmission, the significant expenses of filtering and storing spam fall squarely on mailbox providers and their infrastructure. Experts also reveal that spammers often achieve near-zero sending costs by exploiting stolen or compromised resources, making their business models highly profitable. They point out that many "new" spamming tactics are simply old schemes repackaged, and they emphasize the distinction between legitimate data monetization and illicit spamming practices.
Key opinions
- Recipient Network Costs: The primary cost of spam is borne by the recipient's network, including server resources and the time spent by users sorting unwanted mail. This contrasts sharply with postal mail, where the sender pays the full cost.
- Zero-Cost Spamming: True spam is typically sent from stolen resources, resulting in virtually no sending cost for the spammers themselves, which is why they send it in massive volumes.
- Mailbox Provider Expenses: Spam filtering and message storage are expensive for mailbox providers, with costs multiplying by the number of users on their platforms.
- Monetization Models: Free services like Gmail cover their costs through ads and by monetizing user data, which includes the overhead of dealing with spam. This differs significantly from services that profit from non-consensual data acquisition.
- Spammers Pay: Despite using stolen resources for sending, spammers will pay substantial amounts for data and services that enable their operations, demonstrating the profitability of their illicit business model.
- Old Scams Persist: Many new spammer business models are merely rehashed versions of schemes from decades ago that failed then and continue to fail now, despite spammers' claims of innovation.
Key considerations
- Regulatory Enforcement: Stricter data privacy laws like CCPA, CASL, and GDPR are crucial for holding entities accountable for non-consensual data practices and shifting the cost of spam back to those generating it.
- Defining 'Spam': The definition of spam extends beyond merely unsolicited email to include practices by well-known brands that demonstrate a lack of proper consent management, leading to recipient frustration and deliverability issues.
- Cost of Filtering: The ongoing battle against spam necessitates continuous investment in advanced filtering technologies and the use of mechanisms like spam traps to identify and mitigate threats.
- Email Authentication: Implementing robust email authentication protocols such as DMARC, SPF, and DKIM is critical for legitimate senders to establish trust and avoid being categorized as spam, thereby reducing filtering costs for mailbox providers.
Expert view
An Expert from Email Geeks explains that the cost of spam is primarily borne by the recipient network, including server and network resources, and the time individuals spend sorting their inboxes. They contrast this with postal mail, where the sender pays entirely, noting that spam incurs minimal cost to the sender, particularly when using stolen resources.
Expert view
An Expert from Email Geeks warns that the data provided by services like GetEmails is often based on lies from their vendors. They recount conducting an audit a decade ago that proved data suppliers for similar services were spammers without legitimate opt-in consent, indicating a consistent pattern of deception.
What the documentation says
Official documentation and legislative guides provide the foundational understanding of spam and the legal framework intended to mitigate its impact. These sources define spam, outline compliance requirements for commercial email, and shed light on the economic burden unsolicited messages place on service providers and the broader internet infrastructure. They emphasize that while some laws, like the CAN-SPAM Act, regulate commercial email, the sheer volume and low cost of sending spam continue to make it a persistent problem, forcing recipients and service providers to bear significant filtering and processing expenses.
Key findings
- Legal Framework: The CAN-SPAM Act in the U.S. establishes rules for commercial email, requiring clear identification, opt-out mechanisms, and valid sender information.
- Definition of Spam: Spam is generally defined as unsolicited and unwanted bulk email, often sent for commercial purposes, imposing unconsented costs on recipients and infrastructure.
- Prohibited Practices: The CAN-SPAM Act prohibits charging fees or requiring excessive steps for recipients to opt out of commercial emails.
- Infrastructural Costs: The growth of spam consumes significant bandwidth and resources, leading service providers to absorb considerable costs in managing this unwanted traffic.
- Spammer's Profitability: Spammers profit by sending vast amounts of emails at minimal per-unit cost, making the overall enterprise financially viable for them, often at the expense of others.
Key considerations
- Compliance is Key: Businesses must adhere strictly to acts like the CAN-SPAM Act to avoid legal repercussions and maintain good sender reputation.
- User Experience Focus: Beyond legal compliance, prioritizing a positive user experience, including easy opt-out options and relevant content, reduces spam complaints and improves deliverability.
- Anti-Spam Investment: The ongoing battle against unsolicited bulk email requires continuous investment in technology and human resources from ISPs and security firms.
- Economic Disruption: Spam causes significant economic disruption, wasting time and money for businesses and individuals due to the need for filtering, storage, and handling of unwanted messages.
Technical article
The Abusix documentation states that when external spammers use up bandwidth by sending large volumes of unsolicited emails, service providers are faced with the choice of either absorbing these costs or passing them on. This highlights the financial strain spam places directly on network operators.
Technical article
The Federal Trade Commission's guide on the CAN-SPAM Act specifies that senders cannot charge a fee, demand personal identifying information beyond an email address, or require any step beyond a simple reply or single webpage visit to honor an opt-out request. This legal provision aims to ease the burden on recipients for opting out of unwanted emails.
Related resources
9 resources
Related pages
Why do emails go to spam, and how does high sending frequency affect deliverability?
An in-depth guide to email blocklists
What is an email blacklist and how does it work?
Spam traps: what they are and how they work
How to calculate the monetary value of email deliverability?
Why Your Emails Are Going to Spam in 2024 and How to Fix It
A simple guide to DMARC, SPF, and DKIM
What recourse is available for spam sent from personal email addresses to scraped lists?
How do Spamcop listings and spam traps affect email deliverability and what steps can be taken?
Email Deliverability Issues: Getting Your Messages to the Inbox in 2025
