[extropy-chat] Email Postage

[Brian Lee]

This is the same reason why we get tons of snail mail spam. Enough suckers 
buy stuff to make US$.15 profitable. US$.0025 will still be profitable.

BAL

>From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
>Reply-To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Email Postage
>Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 15:16:10 -0800 (PST)
>
>--- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> > So I can get guaranteed spam deliveries that would be filtered
> > today?  Hmm.  So roughly as long as
> >
> > avg_pos_value * percent_response >  (1 - percent_response) *
> > message_cost
> >
> > it is profitable to send spam.   And I am guaranteed delivery thus
> > raising effective percent_response.  Such a deal.   Do I have that
> > right?
>
>Actually, it's just
>avg_pos_value * percent_response > message_cost
>because you have to pay for the message even when they respond.
>Running the numbers - let's take the high end of the costs,
>where message_cost = $0.01.  percent_response (where the reader
>does not merely respond, but sends the spammer money) might
>optimistically be 0.001, even with guaranteed delivery.  So that
>means that if each time you swindle someone, avg_pos_value (the
>money you get on average) > $10, it's profitable.  Most of the
>scams I've seen appear to be trying to swindle people for > $10.
>
>I'm not too certain about that percent_response (again, because
>it's the % of the time the reader winds up sending the spammer
>money, not merely the % of the time the reader merely reads or
>even just responds to the spam).  But if that assumption is
>correct, then the math still seems to work out in favor of the
>spammer...
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat