Security company Marshal reports that their latest survey found 29% of respondents willing to admit that they have purchased something from a spam e-mail.
While that number seems pretty questionable, PCMag's Appscout points to a related survey from Forrester in 2004 that found 20% of people say they have bought from spammers. In other words, if you believe these studies - it's getting worse, not better.
Marshal (no relation) says that global spam volumes are around 150 billion messages each day and have doubled for the year ending June 2008. We wrote in December about another study, also from a vendor in the anti-spam market, that concluded that 90 to 95% of all email is now spam.
"A common misconception is that 'regular' people don't buy from spam. But, you have to consider the types of products people are buying," Marshal's Bradley Anstis wrote in the company's release today. "It's pirated software, knock-off watches, counterfeit designer goods, cheap drugs and prescription medicines, pornography and other adult material. The Internet provides convenience and a degree of anonymity to people who want to buy illegal or restricted goods. It is a black market and spam has become a conventional means of advertising to a willing audience of millions of people who are purchasing from spam."
The announcement of the study concludes with these funny lines, from Anstis again: "The other way to look at this situation is from a spammer's perspective. There are approximately 250 million people out there who are interested in these kinds of products and have made purchases from spam in the past. That's equivalent to double the population of Japan mixed in with every other Internet user. As a spammer - how do you reach that market without knowing specifically who these people are and with the bare minimum of expense? Easy, send lots of emails to everyone."
If you buy Marshal's numbers, and they have a vested interest in painting a large threat, perhaps the market has spoken. It sounds like people want spam, after all. What other e-commerce channel would 30% of respondents admit having bought something from? Doesn't sound like something that needs to be illegal.
Of course these numbers should be taken with a giant grain of salt. The study was of just over 600 respondents who visited the Marshal website. The question they were asked appears to have been framed in a pretty presumptuous way. "What purchases have you made from spam?"
This author has never bought anything from spam. I swear.
The percentage of people who have clicked on a topical looking ad on a spam blog that showed up in search is probably even higher. The satisfaction with that spam is probably much higher than satisfaction with email spam.
Those of us who want to use online communication channels for serious purposes, and I don't mean serious like S&M fantasies, may be forever forced to wade through a sea of people who are less discerning and the spammers who email us all in order to find them.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4708
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Sounds very high, but something has to turn the weals of SPAM. They must make some money or they wouldn't be around. They do not do it just to annoy me, even if sometimes I think they do. The latest hit: "Converting your car to run on water is proven to lower fuel costs, increase mileage - and help the environment." And someone somewhere is falling for it. Grrr.....
Posted by: Raanan Avidor
|
August 19, 2008 3:56 PM
well, it would have been could to give a definition of the spam which was used for the purpose of the survey.
Are we talking about spams or scams ?
Posted by: Anonymous | August 19, 2008 4:02 PM
Eww.... no wonder the spammers keep doing what they do -- it works!
Posted by: Julie Kentwood
|
August 19, 2008 4:03 PM
The very simple fact that this was just a survey done on their website completely invalidates any meaning from this. All it means is that 29% of people who bothered to take a survey on their site claim they've bought from spam.
That's definitely not a representative sample of any large population, so this is essentially a non-story. It would be extremely interesting to look at various segments based on income, education, country, etc to see how the percentages vary, but I would highly doubt at least the US/Western Europe average would be that high for the last year or so. I don't know enough about other major internet markets and behaviors to guess outside of that (although I would expect purchases to be fairly low in Japan/South Korea at least).
Posted by: James | August 19, 2008 4:03 PM
there are also people buying ringtones every single day. ;)
Posted by: Nicole Simon
|
August 19, 2008 4:10 PM
Look, me and the King of Nigeria go way back. What business is it of yours if I give him money?
Posted by: Anrkist | August 19, 2008 4:14 PM
Oh, that's horrible! :(
Btw, Marshall, you totally cracked me up with your "no relation" comment. ha ha!
Posted by: Sarah Perez
|
August 19, 2008 4:15 PM
I call baloney on this spam report. Bad data, wrong questions, who were the respondents- first time on the net folks? Did they all send money to the honorable so and so?
Posted by: Michael Sean Wright | August 19, 2008 5:07 PM
Uhmm, so you're saying McCain's got a chance?
Posted by: dj | August 19, 2008 7:52 PM
This study relies on the consumer's perception of spam. I work for an extremely reputable e-mail newsletter and our sponsored e-mails (what anybody in the industry would refer to as 'e-mail marketing') is often responded to by consumers as if it was spam. If an e-mail is trying to sell something, it is pretty much instantly regarded as spam. Meaning, those opt-in e-mails from Pottery Barn, Red Envelope, etc...are still regarded as spam by a large portion of readers even if they buy something from it.
Posted by: Evan Moore
|
August 19, 2008 8:14 PM
Nevermind the percentage. SOME people buy from spammers. That's plenty more than enough to encourage spam.
Anrkist: that was too funny.
Posted by: Conrado | August 19, 2008 8:42 PM
'Those of us who want to use online communication channels for serious purposes, and I don't mean serious like S&M fantasies, may be forever forced to wade through a sea of people who are less discerning and the spammers who email us all in order to find them.'
Hmmm, sounds like the real world to me....
Posted by: Jon | August 19, 2008 10:00 PM
Quote: "This study relies on the consumer's perception of spam"..."If an e-mail is trying to sell something, it is pretty much instantly regarded as spam"
My perception is that if get get unsolicited offers to buy something in my email box...I have been spammed. Besides with all the spam around how ary you to distinguish between real offers and scams? Even if something looks right it would be a big risk to trust that its legitimate.
Posted by: BG | August 19, 2008 10:24 PM
@James I'm with you. This tells us something about Marshall and PCMag.
And just to prove the point the readwriteweb poll is currently markedly different results.
Posted by: Allen | August 19, 2008 11:39 PM
But more than half the stuff, I have no idea what they are selling?! All this garbage does is keep my SpamBully working overtime! Yeesh!
Posted by: Brad | August 20, 2008 9:46 AM
why is the number hard to believe? i knew a guy years back who sent spams out to sell contact lenses (not pirated software, viagra or anything illegal but normal contact lenese that people can buy from conventional retail channels) and he did quite well. considering the number of spams out there and the wide of things they try to sell... and considering anyone who's done it just once can respond yes to this survey... why is this number too high?
Posted by: Allen | August 21, 2008 1:07 AM
Hi Marhsall,
How much do you make every month from your blog? I see you have Google Ads, so whenever someone clicks on them, you get paid 20 cents or so.
Posted by: Lalan | August 25, 2008 2:42 PM