SPAM work :( I know few web sites builder who promote themselves using SPAM.
They send a mail with a nice website interface and an image of a girl smile + a nice sentence "You can start doing money today !! order a website - call us for a meeting". The sad thing is that this method works :( I see how we, the honest companies that don't send spam loosing customers to them. they said to me: "what do I care, I send the messages and people start to ask for appointments from us. so we get some angry messages, so what ?" -------------------------- Canaan Surfing Ltd. Internet Service Providers Ben-Nes Michael - Manager Tel: 972-4-6991122 Fax: 972-4-6990098 http://www.canaan.net.il -------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Shachar Shemesh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Linux-IL mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 2:23 PM Subject: Re: [OT]nesws regarding vigros chicks > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004, Shachar Shemesh wrote about "[OT]nesws regarding vigros chicks": > > Here goes - spam is so common because the return on investment for > > sending spam is so huge. You spend nickels sending millions of messages, > > I think that the situation is many times different from what you describe. > I think the spamming subculture has two strata (to similify things): call > them "spam providers" and "spamvertizers". > > A spamvertiser has some business, scam or political idea that he wants to > advertise, but no technical knowhow in sending out spam (amassing ISP > accounts, building open relay lists, addresses, mail software, anti-filtering, > etc.). So he contacts a "spam provider", a company that sells him "delivery > of 10,000,000 copies for $1000" and pays them. The spam provider guarantees > nothing beyond this - they do not guarantee any ROI. Often, I believe, the > spamvertiser will find that he is getting mounds of hate mail, legal threats, > and very little, if any, ROI, but he has already paid his $1000. Having seen > the reprecautions, this spamvertiser may repent and not hire spam providers > again - but there is a new sucker - and spamvertiser - born every minute. > Sometimes the spamvertiser succeeeds (e.g., just ONE sucker falls for the > 409 scam and sends $2000 to the spamvertiser), and continues to hire this > spam provider. > > > and get several bucks in return from the 0.5% of actual buys. Recent > > trends, however, are eroding this ROI away. Either because better > > filters cause the number of people who buy to decrease, or because > > striger control over open relays increase the costs of sending. We all > > know that by now, of course. > > I believe that as much of 90% of the spam I get is unintelligable: either > written in bizarre foreign language, as HTML-only, as pictures (that I do > not watch), filled with obfuscating characters and words, and so on. Sometimes > I even get spams without any sensible message at all. It doesn't seem to be > bothering the spam providers, who are still making their buck. And frankly, > it also doesn't bother my spam filter which still has a 99.5% suceess rate > in recognizing spam. In fact, some of these obfuscation techniques just make > the spams easier to spot (and harder to confuse for real message). > > > This is good because of another aspect of things. This suggests that > > there are people who are running spam filters, and even baysian spam > > filters, who actually buy stuff advertised in spam. In other words - > > baysian spam filters are now common enough for ordinary "clueless" > > people to use. Presumably, spammers only started doing these changes > > because they saw their return dimminish. > > Another reason is possible: spam providers have to fight each other over > their clients, the spamvertisers. Boasting more features like "filter > avoidance" can improve their chances of getting clients. There might be no > real need for those filter avoidance techniques. Just like peacocks evolved > their long tails, without a "real" reason. > > > Then again, maybe not. For example - I'm confounded if I can understand > > why spammers will vigorously spam people who ask to be removed. > > Presumably, if someone asks to be removed, he is highly unlikely to ever > > buy something from you. Spamming him again will only cost you the > > (insignificant, but still) money, with almost no hope of seeing any > > back. I'm not sure what this means about the above logic. > > Again, I can think of several reasons - one is my above provider/spamvertiser > model. The provider gets paid by spam sent out, not by success ratio, so > he doesn't care about the success of the spam. In fact, if the provider has > a list of 10,000,000 addresses and suddenly half of them want out, he can > now only boast 5,000,000 addresses and get half the money - a big lose for > the provider. > > A related reason is the cost ratio. Writing software to handle "remove"s > and the related computers costs money, which is hard to steal (like spammers > do with most other resources they use). Sending out a few more copies of the > spam costs very little, if at all. > > Another reason is the evidence trail. Having a real address for sending > removal requests means that it is easier to trace the spam provider, which > is naturally something they do not want. > > > For example, it may just mean that spammers want to spam. They don't > > care whether people actually buy stuff. They spam like we write software. > > If this was the case, you'd see more "I Love ..." or "... was here!" type > of spams. No, I think spam providers are actually making money. But my hunch > is that most of this income comes from spamvertisers which invent the idiotic > sales pitches we get in our inbox, not from the actual recipients of that > email. > > -- > Nadav Har'El | Wednesday, Jan 21 2004, 27 Tevet 5764 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] |------------------------------------- ---- > Phone: +972-53-790466, ICQ 13349191 |There are 2 ways to do it - my way and > http://nadav.harel.org.il |the right way > > ================================================================= > To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command > echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
