Comments on: Analysing MyNiceMailAt.com http://boakes.org/analysing-mynicemailatcom/ nice of you to drop by. tea? Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:42:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-hemorrhage hourly 1 By: kwa http://boakes.org/analysing-mynicemailatcom/#comment-4965 kwa Tue, 08 Nov 2005 21:35:40 +0000 http://boakes.org/?p=520#comment-4965 I can notice Google finds about 1,140 pages linking to the spamming site: http://www.google.com/search?q=link%3Amynicemailat.com That would mean each spam comment gave "you" about one reader. This is a very interesting information. That means even if the best CAPTCHA barrier can be skipped using a real human to enter the asked code, that becomes extremly expensive compared to the hit ratio. I consider a spammer can hope to interest about 0,1% of its readers (this is a personal estimation based only on my own personal feelings, not any real data), so that whole spamming week would only made only 1 visitors to register on that site?! Is spamming really worth all that? Aren't standard marketing ways more efficient? Doesn't that mean spamming is a wrong way to find new clients? I can notice Google finds about 1,140 pages linking to the spamming site:

http://www.google.com/search?q=link%3Amynicemailat.com

That would mean each spam comment gave “you” about one reader. This is a very interesting information. That means even if the best CAPTCHA barrier can be skipped using a real human to enter the asked code, that becomes extremly expensive compared to the hit ratio.

I consider a spammer can hope to interest about 0,1% of its readers (this is a personal estimation based only on my own personal feelings, not any real data), so that whole spamming week would only made only 1 visitors to register on that site?! Is spamming really worth all that? Aren’t standard marketing ways more efficient? Doesn’t that mean spamming is a wrong way to find new clients?

]]>