±±¾©Èü³µpk10

When is opt-out not opt-out? This isn't a trick question, but ever since the Electoral Commission had anything to do with giving voters the right to tick a box to stop their details being passed on for marketing purposes, it has become one in the minds of consumers.

This was the unanimous conclusion of this month's Think Tank panellists, all of whom have seen the market for data change dramatically in the 12 months since consumers were given the ability to opt-out of handing their names over to marketers. From data collectors, users and providers, our panel agree that never before has the mailing landscape been so confused.

It's a state that none of them think will change any time soon, with it more likely to worsen than improve. We used the publication of research by GB Group revealing the different regional levels of opt-out and the fears this creates to bring our panel together, but the discussion soon turned much broader.

"The scale of opt-out has been closely linked with reduced mailing in those same areas," says David Green, marketing director of GB Group. "This is a worrying trend. It's a sign that mailers are having difficulty finding people. We even think this could lead to an increase in unaddressed mail as a way of getting around it - something that won't do the industry any good at all."

According to Acxiom's Betty Doyle, who is in charge of what used to be Claritas's Lifestyle Universe questionnaires, opt-out from the Electoral Roll (ER) has reached 27 per cent overall, but with wide variation - the highest level being Bridgend, Wales, at 84 per cent. However, as she points out to an all-nodding audience, it's both consumers and mailers who are losing out.

"The loss of this dataset is huge to mailers, yet consumers are wrongly thinking it will end their direct mail. While we can't expect consumers to know the ins and outs of it, what's needed is a clear presentation of what happens in suppression."

Green blames the continued failure of councils for not fully explaining that opt-out of the ER only means opting out of passing names onto third parties and isn't a substitute for the Mailing Preference Service (MPS).

Indeed, as this year's papers come round again, he's also critical of the pre-ticked forms going to those who opted out last year - something he says is "completely at odds with the idea of the tick box being added", which is to give people choice.

Carry on mailing

The problem each of our panellists face is that it's still very easy to mail people who have opted out of the ER, either accidentally or not. If people think that by ticking the ER box they've opted out of receiving mail full-stop, many on our panel say this is a problem. At the same time though, there are those, such as Alison Newman, direct marketing manager at Allianz Cornhill, who says that just because someone has opted out, that's not a reason to stop mailing them. "We don't stop mailing people just because they've opted out of the ER," she says. "As long as we can find them from other sources, then this is something we'll clearly do."

Newman argues that just because people opt-out from their name being used, it doesn't mean they aren't mail responsive. In fact, as Green, Doyle and Thomas Adalbert, managing director of opt-in list company The Preference Service, can all recall, sometimes the best responders have come from so-called suppressed files.

But the dichotomy can clearly be seen. Either consumers who opt-out of the ER want mail or they don't - it can't be argued both ways - can it? "People may say they don't want mail, but then they get married, have kids, buy a car and then suddenly want car or house insurance mailings," says Newman.

Patrice Bendon, senior product manager, prospect targeting at Experian, doesn't believe that people who opt-out of the ER also opt-out of filling in lifestyle surveys. Doyle, however, argues there must be some crossover, and adds that confusion is clearly apparent because people who fill in her lifestyle surveys also put themselves on the MPS and need suppressing.

"This is why it's so important that opt-out to the ER doesn't climb much further," she argues. "It's not just there for generating names and addresses, but also for profiling and data enhancement purposes. We think the industry will be seriously affected if overall opt-out hits 40 per cent."

All the debate about whether consumers understand what they're opting out of fell naturally to Adalbert. "Opt-out to the ER doesn't opt people out of mail, but only stops their details being passed on. Plenty of people want mail, but only what they're interested in receiving. The more people opt-out of the ER, the more it means people want targeted mail," he says.

Currently, Adalbert is getting an 11 per cent response from his surveys, which have now produced opt-in areas of interest from 3.5 million homes. Bendon isn't impressed, though: "The cost per response just can't stack up. It's still volume that people need and ultimately, if people go to you, just like opting out of the ER, they still aren't guaranteed an end to junk mail."

Adalbert is quick to defend this: "We make it very clear we're not the MPS and that while people will still see mail, eventually the mail they do get will be more relevant. We've sold 72 million names - not big - but 72 million relevant names is having an impact. In fact, since Brassed Off Britain was aired in June, we've collected more than 4,000 names from the BBC website alone. Given that the programme was deliberately taking a swipe at direct mail and our mention was buried on the site, this is a pretty impressive response."

Finding the middle way

Adalbert makes the point that the ER appears to offer consumers a blanket 'no' to direct mail, when really this is the preserve of the MPS, and nobody wants this to be publicised on the ER. "It's either a blanket 'yes' or a blanket 'no' for mail, which isn't the true way consumers want to receive mail."

Newman says she has a blanket opt-out to mail policy among her customers, but is in the processing of changing this. "We're looking at having variable opt-out, so that people only get mail on certain products. We recently did a test where we contacted people who said they didn't want our mailings and we asked them if they realised that they would never get certain information from us ever again, and many people actually changed their minds."

It is from this mindset - that even if people think they don't want mail, they actually do - that Bendon and Doyle progress with the many products that will find the people who have opted out from the ER with a view to mailing them. However, even Bendon is the first to agree that these are now being as used as indiscriminately as the ER was for prospecting, the very reason opt-out was added.

"All this replacement data is trying to find ways of mailing people who don't want to be mailed," argues Adalbert. "The problem with these lists is that you try to find as many reasons as possible why you should mail them - such as 'are they the right profile? Probably. Do they appear on another list? Yes - but it still doesn't answer the consumer's problem, which is 'I don't want to receive any of this'."

He cites data pools as one example where a consumer may have opted out of receiving mail with one company, but agreed to mail from another. Because the two firms share data in a data pool, both can find a way of mailing.

Improving list management

Mark Greenhouse, marketing insights manager at CPP Group, which offers financial, health and automotive products on behalf of more than 300 business partners, agrees. "We often have to deal with up to 50 files per mailing, and you can often have people who don't want to be contacted from one business partner, but do from another. There's no opt-out on this."

To solve this, he demands that partners don't supply them with the same names on consecutive months, as the same name may have already come from a different partner. This prevents the offer going to the same name from multiple sources. Greenhouse believes the issues around the ER come as much from list management as anything else.

"What we're really talking about is control, not over-mailing people, so we're not wasting everybody's time and destroying a client's brand. If more companies thought more of lifetime value, people wouldn't be talking about opting out of mail because it would be so relevant to them."

Defining standards

Best practice is difficult to nail down. Some bad elements - some around the table know of firms that sell the older, pre-opt-out ER - can be eliminated. Others are harder to call. Take those who are on the MPS, but also on Adalbert's lists. Adalbert says he doesn't clean his list against the MPS because they have opted in to mail. "We say just because some people are on the MPS, they have also specifically opted in with us. The way the data situation is arranged means that if we did clean against the MPS, valuable data about people that want mail would disappear."

But whether people opting out of the ER represent those who do or don't want mail is still the ultimate question. It certainly came no closer to being answered in our debate. But if it can't be answered, there are calls from all to make data ownership and sharing easier to understand for the public.

"I really do think there's confusion," says Bendon. "As an industry we need to work with the DMA and get it to educate consumers. It's not happening at the moment, and it's a big issue."

The wounds of losing great swathes of the ER are, as our Thank Tank debate has shown, still sore. None of our panellists want an end to the ER and all want to send mail only to those who welcome it.

The potential for a solution is out there somewhere.

THE PANELLIST LINE UP

DAVID GREEN, group marketing, GB Group: Green has more than eight years' experience and is responsible for driving the strategic development of GB Group, which works with some of the UK's best-known organisations to derive maximum value from customer data.

MARK GREENHOUSE, marketing insights manager, CPP Group: Greenhouse joined CPP in 2001 and has shifted the focus of the market research team from the UK to the international market. He now works predominantly on customer analytics. Prior to CPP, he worked at Boots and Walkers Snacks.

THOMAS ADALBERT, founder and managing director, The Preference Service: Adalbert has worked for various firms including Tri-Direct and Consodata. At BMG and News International, he created lifestyle data collection programmes, which were used for marketing and revenue generating activities.

ALISON NEWMAN, marketing manager, Cornhill Direct Life: Newman has more than 20 years' experience working in direct marketing for several major financial services organisations. Her current role specialises in life cover to the over 50s.

PATRICE BENDON, senior product manager, Experian Marketing Services: Bendon as more than 15 years' experience in DM on both the agency and client side. She is responsible for clients' data solutions, drawing on the edited Electoral Roll and using lifestyle and modelling techniques.

BETTY DOYLE, head of data partnerships, Acxiom: Doyle spent a number of years in the credit referencing sector as well as a marketing manager for an affinity credit card company before joining Claritas seven years ago. Her responsibility is in data alliances and analysis.

txt2email: You can send a copy of this article to a friend's email account by texting this message, 'MxD 1005 'recipient's email address', to 82058. Text messages are charged at standard network rates.