AnsweredAssumed Answered

Second Send to Non-Opens

Question asked by Adam Berlin on Nov 22, 2019
Latest reply on Nov 25, 2019 by Adam Berlin

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 7

I am trying to create a Smart List send to anyone who didn't open the first send, and I'm having trouble finding info on how to set it up in docs.Marketo or here (although I could be missing it).

Attached is a screenshot of what I have created, it plays off the first send, which had a Flow step that added anyone who opened the email to the list (MMEM 2019-11-18 SV.Opened) referenced in step 3.

So my question is, will the Smart List screenshot function as I hope it will? Is there a more efficient way I could be doing this?

Thanks!

Michael Florin Nov 25, 2019 4:41 AM

Correct Answer

I'd say A and B are functionally the same, if - as Sanford already said - you have a trigger campaign that adds openers of your email to this static list. Adding them to the list in a flow step of your email sending batch campaign would not be sufficient as people can potentially open the email days after you sent it.

See the reply in context

Attachments

Send-to-Non-Opens.jpg64.8 KB

No one else had this question

Outcomes

Sanford Whiteman Nov 22, 2019 9:25 AM

Pls remove the attachment and paste the image inline in the editor. Not all Community users can see attachments.

1 person found this helpful

Actions

Sanford Whiteman Nov 22, 2019 9:36 AM

Why are you checking to see if they were added to the list (which doesn't mean they're still on the list) instead of that they're currently Member of List?
How does being on the list (of openers) differ from having an Opened Email? Are these not redundant in your instance?

2 people found this helpful

Actions

Adam Berlin @ Sanford Whiteman on Nov 22, 2019 9:46 AM

To be honest, I was just trying that out to see if it worked, if currently Member of List is the more efficient way (or just the more logical way) I can definitely switch to that.
Good question: to my knowledge, if it would be redundant in a normal instance, than the same would be true for our instance, so I can make that update as well. To confirm, you are suggesting in a normal instance, removing step 3 (Not Was Added to List) and that it should function with just Not Opened Email? I think I was trying to over-engineer it, to ensure no one that opened the first send received the second send.

Actions

Sanford Whiteman @ Adam Berlin on Nov 22, 2019 10:03 AM

I'm saying that if you're already adding them to a static list based on triggered activity (i.e. they opened the email) then you should directly check membership in that list.

Not only is it vastly more efficient to check Member of List than constantly looking back into the Activity Log, the ActLog ages some activities out; if they're in the list, they stay there forever. (In your 30 day window nothing will actually age out, but you always have to consider this possibility when building filters.)

1 person found this helpful

Actions

Adam Berlin @ Sanford Whiteman on Nov 22, 2019 11:46 AM

Thanks for the heads up on the age-out functionality (that is really good to know), I actually found a cool resource here: https://nation.marketo.com/docs/DOC-5765-marketo-activities-data-retention-policy-under-the-hood#jive_content_id_Activit… after searching online for those timelines (it appears they are 90 days and 25 months, depending on the activities).

So between the two choices below (please see inline images), am I correct in understanding that you suggest pursuing a route like option A. instead of option B. as a general best practice? If that is correct, what further non-ActLog filters should be added to insure that the entire customer database doesn't get sent the second send (which in the current quick config. that I setup below is the case)?

Option A:

Option B:

Actions

Michael Florin @ Adam Berlin on Nov 25, 2019 4:41 AM

1 person found this helpful

Actions

Adam Berlin @ Michael Florin on Nov 25, 2019 12:54 PM

Thanks Michael Florin and Sanford Whiteman, I really appreciate the help. For anyone reading this thread, I ended up going with Option B., as it matched my expected number of Non-Opens from Send 1 almost exactly. But the validity in both Sanford and Michael's statements (in terms of using resources that will remain unchanged in the system) definitely seems to show in the "almost" portion of that sentence, and in future sends I will definitely take that into consideration when using ActLog triggers.

Actions

7 Replies

Sanford Whiteman Nov 22, 2019 9:25 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Pls remove the attachment and paste the image inline in the editor. Not all Community users can see attachments.
1 person found this helpful
Like • Show 1 Like1
Actions
Sanford Whiteman Nov 22, 2019 9:36 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
- Why are you checking to see if they were added to the list (which doesn't mean they're still on the list) instead of that they're currently Member of List?
- How does being on the list (of openers) differ from having an Opened Email? Are these not redundant in your instance?
2 people found this helpful
Like • Show 2 Likes2
Actions
- Adam Berlin @ Sanford Whiteman on Nov 22, 2019 9:46 AM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  To be honest, I was just trying that out to see if it worked, if currently Member of List is the more efficient way (or just the more logical way) I can definitely switch to that.
  Good question: to my knowledge, if it would be redundant in a normal instance, than the same would be true for our instance, so I can make that update as well. To confirm, you are suggesting in a normal instance, removing step 3 (Not Was Added to List) and that it should function with just Not Opened Email? I think I was trying to over-engineer it, to ensure no one that opened the first send received the second send.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
  - Sanford Whiteman @ Adam Berlin on Nov 22, 2019 10:03 AM
    Mark Correct
    Correct Answer
    I'm saying that if you're already adding them to a static list based on triggered activity (i.e. they opened the email) then you should directly check membership in that list.
    
    Not only is it vastly more efficient to check Member of List than constantly looking back into the Activity Log, the ActLog ages some activities out; if they're in the list, they stay there forever. (In your 30 day window nothing will actually age out, but you always have to consider this possibility when building filters.)
    1 person found this helpful
    Like • Show 2 Likes2
    Actions
    - Adam Berlin @ Sanford Whiteman on Nov 22, 2019 11:46 AM
      Mark Correct
      Correct Answer
      Thanks for the heads up on the age-out functionality (that is really good to know), I actually found a cool resource here: https://nation.marketo.com/docs/DOC-5765-marketo-activities-data-retention-policy-under-the-hood#jive_content_id_Activit… after searching online for those timelines (it appears they are 90 days and 25 months, depending on the activities).
      
      So between the two choices below (please see inline images), am I correct in understanding that you suggest pursuing a route like option A. instead of option B. as a general best practice? If that is correct, what further non-ActLog filters should be added to insure that the entire customer database doesn't get sent the second send (which in the current quick config. that I setup below is the case)?
      
      Option A:
      
      Option B:
      Like • Show 0 Likes0
      Actions
      - Michael Florin @ Adam Berlin on Nov 25, 2019 4:41 AM
        Unmark Correct
        Correct Answer
        I'd say A and B are functionally the same, if - as Sanford already said - you have a trigger campaign that adds openers of your email to this static list. Adding them to the list in a flow step of your email sending batch campaign would not be sufficient as people can potentially open the email days after you sent it.
        1 person found this helpful
        Like • Show 2 Likes2
        Actions
        Adam Berlin @ Michael Florin on Nov 25, 2019 12:54 PM
        Mark Correct
        Correct Answer
        Thanks Michael Florin and Sanford Whiteman, I really appreciate the help. For anyone reading this thread, I ended up going with Option B., as it matched my expected number of Non-Opens from Send 1 almost exactly. But the validity in both Sanford and Michael's statements (in terms of using resources that will remain unchanged in the system) definitely seems to show in the "almost" portion of that sentence, and in future sends I will definitely take that into consideration when using ActLog triggers.
        Like • Show 0 Likes0
        Actions

Second Send to Non-Opens

Attachments

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content