±±¾©Èü³µpk10

Keep using the same thing and the more worn out it becomes. Right? Wrong - at least according to some people in the DM market that is. While common sense dictates that if companies keep mailing the 'top responders' then the quality of the list must decline, the industry view can be all too different.

"It sounds contradictory but those that get the most mail do so because they continue to be the most responsive," says Dawn Orr, managing director of Consodata. "Clients are as keen as mustard to keep selling these lists."

As our Top 100 Direct Mail Spenders report in this issue and the DMA Census shows, there's no doubt that mailing volumes continue to rise.

It follows that key lists must be being used more and it also follows that ultimately this strategy must backfire. Never has there been a better time for somebody - preferably the list broker - to police list usage and push for tired ones to be rested. But with everyone's profits resting on the sheer number of times a list is sold, the incentive for doing so will not be there until the threat of exhaustion appears. So how close are we to this happening?

"We have lists that people would consider overused on a purely numbers basis," says Jonathan Longden, list sales manager at HLB, which manages lists from Viz to Loot. "The thing is, there's no evidence to suggest their response has dropped."

According to Longden, data cleanliness is as much the issue as usage.

He says continually knocking off old or inaccurate data while adding new data from the top obviates the issue. He also uses a system of rotation to ensure that names - while randomly chosen - are not the same as those last rented by the same client. This ensures the universe is moved through steadily. But Longden is the first to admit that this isn't standard, with most lists 'humped and dumped' regardless.

Rigorous list management is key to the long-term health of this industry, as is the regular injection of fresh data.

CACI recently launched Charity Sector, a new list pool produced by modelling real donor data onto the Consumer Register. According to vice president Caroline Kimber, the first two charities to trial it found it outperformed actual donor files: "It was reaching people who weren't being over mailed and were therefore far more responsive to the mailing."

Bill Burley, director of subscriptions at agency CCB-Profits from Data, calls for more drastic action to boost response rates.

"The list renting model is built on the cost-per-name, sell-as-many-names-as-possible model," he explains. "Until list owners and users move more to a value model - where brokers are paid commission based on results - the over-mailing trend will continue to grow."

A payment-by-results model is unlikely to go down well, not least because the list brokers and managers have no control over the creative or offer - both of which impact on response rates. And even testing certain overused lists wouldn't work, says Nicola MacRobbie from Dudley Jenkins List Broking.

"Consumers are on multiple lists," she points out. "Even if individual list owners rest their data, they're still likely to get mail from other sources. There's no way to protect consumers from getting more mail."

It is easy to see why this propagates the 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' attitude from the list owners and brokers. David Green, marketing manager at GB Group, blames the 'one-off' nature of work by brokers. "Brokers are fighting for buyers based on price, not consultancy. Because names can be bought from more than one source, they're entering into one-off renting relationships purely for volume," he says.

Each time Green registers with organisations, he deliberately throws in spelling mistakes so he can pinpoint how many times a specific list owner has sold his name. At the last count, he says 40 separate companies had bought the Institute of Direct Marketing's own registration database alone.

What's obvious is that exclusivity agreements are over. "I remember when you weren't allowed to remail someone about insurance within six months," recollects Amaya Tasker, managing director of data provision at Swetenhams.

However, if over-mailing on some lists gets worse - and some say it will - a near return to this situation could well happen.

Longden admits he has seen evidence, particularly in the mail order sector, that people are restricting how often their data is used. "If this becomes prevalent," he says, "lists could be bought like inserts, with guaranteed time-slots booked a while in advance. This could start bidding wars for some data at particular times of the year."

This idea isn't as far fetched as it sounds. David Burrows, planning director at agency TDA, believes self restraint must be instilled for the longer term profit of the industry. "The only way to deal with the problem of overuse of lists is for the industry to agree a maximum number of times individual names can be rented, with slots being auctioned. The list owner won't lose because rationed names will be granted a higher price. List renters also benefit from a corresponding rise in response."

Whether the rest of the list industry agrees is another matter. As long as people are receiving relevant mail, list brokers will support more mail. And, as Richard Lees, managing director of The Database Group, says: "We don't yet enrage people about the volume of mail they get, but we're toughening them up to receiving more."

TACKLING LIST FATIGUE IN THE CHARITY SECTOR

In 1993, data services provider and list broker Occam set up Reciprocate, a scheme to help charities deal with list fatigue. Today, Reciprocate comprises 110 charity supporter databases totalling more than 28 million gross records, or 12.5 million individuals.

Using supporter overlaps and affinities, Occam identifies the most appropriate charity for each client to swap with. Results are regularly four to five times better than renting a cold list. To protect the consumer from over-mailing and potential charity fatigue, Occam insists that each participating charity pre-determines how many times a year a supporter can be used in a swap mailing. Limits vary but average five times a year. They also tend to exclude their most valuable' supporters - legacy pledgers and high-value donors - from reciprocal mailings, not only to protect the supporter from over-mailing but also to protect the relationship they have. When a name has been used in a mailing, Occam imposes a standard four-week block before that name re-enters the swap pool. It also ensures even rotation of a donor file by not mailing a name again until every other swappable name on the file has been mailed. As a result, response for charities using Reciprocate is regularly 10-15 per cent, and can exceed 20 per cent.

FASHION CATALOGUE PROTECTS RENTAL VALUE

Tri-Direct manages the list of buyers from Wall Luxury Essentials, the fashion catalogue that has a high ABC1 make-up and more than 13,000 records of people who have bought from the company within the past 12 months. Average order value is a high £220. Steve Reid, managing director of Tri-Direct sales, says Wall is an example of a new breed of list owner cautious not to over-sell its list to third parties. He says: "Wall has asked us what a realistic forecast of turning the list is. It won't pass on its most recently acquired customers and its limit is to rent 20,000 names at a time." Reid adds: "While Wall is trying to maximise its asset, it's also being very selective. It insists on seeing a sample of any mail pack that the data is used to post to."