Can you tell from reading this email what the offer is for? Neither can I. That's why this email from JetBlue merits a Fail for Content.
Lesson: Touting an incentive is inadequate if you don't explain your product or service.
Examples of and lessons from communications that neglect basic direct marketing Best Practices.
Can you tell from reading this email what the offer is for? Neither can I. That's why this email from JetBlue merits a Fail for Content.
Lesson: Touting an incentive is inadequate if you don't explain your product or service.
When I started this blog 15 years ago, my intent was to share direct marketing lessons using real-world communications as examples. While I have been able to focus on my professional passion by writing these posts, I also hope you enjoyed reading and learning from them.
My goal of this blog hasn't changed over a decade and a half, but direct marketing jargon has -- so I'm updating the categories I use to classify Mail That Fails.
The terms may have changed, but these basic principles applied 15 years ago -- and they're still important for both physical mail and email.
Email deployment tools are continuing to be more sophisticated and more complex. Marketers need to start with the basics such as target audience and desired outcome to drive their messaging approach. We need to stay relevant by executing cleanly and on a timely basis.
Sometimes there are circumstances beyond a marketer's control, so not every campaign can be successful. But by keeping core marketing principles in mind, we can avoid producing Mail That Fails.
Last Wednesday, I received this email from 7-Eleven touting “Wing Wednesday” with an
offer for cheap wings. Is this Mail That Fails?
With a subject line of “It is Wings Day, my Dudes,” it seems
like there is a special price on wings that particular day. That impression is
bolstered by text saying, “Celebrate with some wings for less.”
![]() |
![]() |
| Wing Wednesday email |
Plus, the picture prominently displays, “WING WEDNESDAY” in
the background and body copy touting, “You made it mid-week!” These both suggest
that the 5/$5 Bone-in Wings is available only on, well, Wednesday.
But the email was sent to me at 10:25 pm on Wednesday, and
no matter how much I might love wings, that seems a bit late in the day to be prompted
for a mid-week wing order. So is this a Fail for
Timing?
Maybe not. Down in the Disclosures, we learn that the wings
offer is valid “thru” 1/9/24. So, it appears that I could enjoy these 5/$5
wings on a Thursday or on any other day over the next few months. Perhaps this
is a bit of a Fail for
Creative because it might mislead readers into thinking the offer is valid
only on Wednesday -- putting a damper on responsiveness.
Finally, is 7-Eleven using “thru” rather than
“through” to be informal and relatable? I don’t know.
Lessons:
I recently received a B2B email announcing “exciting news,” and it piqued my interest in all the wrong ways -- meriting a Fail for Content and perhaps even for Targeting.
First of
all, the email is from someone at Numerix I
don’t know and who I’ve never met, contacted, or connected with, and at a
company I’ve never heard of. Yet this person sends me an email that opens with “Exciting
News.”
Then, the email
uses so much financial jargon that even I can’t figure out what it means -- and
I work in the financial industry. What does Numerix do? What can it do for me
or my employer? I don’t know, but I guess the acquisition helps them address a
bunch of stuff I don’t care about.
I guess
this is exciting for Numerix but, without any value proposition, this is simply
a press release with several typos.
Lessons:
![]() |
| Offer for May 8 - 14 Sent May 14, 3:05 pm |
Lesson:
An offer for Mother's Day should be sent days prior to Mother's Day, not on Mother's Day afternoon.
![]() |
| So many Celebrity Cruises emails, so little time to read them |
Lesson:
Direct marketing isn't only transactional. It's about building a relationship that improves the customer experience.
Dunkin' recently overhauled their Dunkin' Rewards loyalty program. Some regular customers are not pleased. Coffee rewards that used to be available after spending $40 on coffee now require at least $50 in spend. The program has also become more complex, with a different points earning formula, monthly boosters and a greater emphasis on food. With greater complexity comes greater risk of error.
I would describe myself as an occasional coffee achiever. I might stop for coffee early in the morning when walking the dog, but not that often. I currently have 257 points according to my app -- not enough for one free coffee.
![]() |
| Screenshot showing I have 257 points |
So, imagine my surprise when I received this email.
![]() |
| Points amount email 34,438 points = almost 69 free coffees! |
The points value in the email is not only incorrect, it is outrageously wrong. Why would anyone hold on to 34,000 points?
In a prior role, I worked on a loyalty program mailing that included a mention of a customer's point balance. Here are some of the quality control steps I took:
Lesson:
When sending personalized information, verify the accuracy of all variable data including outliers.
Since last July, the value of PayPal stock has fallen by about 75%. While many analysts are discussing the company's "fundamentals" and suggesting at what price to purchase the stock, I'm staying away for a different reason -- because they often produce Mail That Fails.
My first post about PayPal's several Fails was in 2011 when they mailed me a shoddy credit offer. There are a few more, including a recent one about a confusing and poorly targeted Venmo offer. Now, add to my list of PayPal Fails this offer of "$1 cash back for every $20 spent at restaurants."
Scanning the headline might make you think that going out to lunch four times -- spending $25 each time with your GooglePay app to use your PayPal balance for those lunches -- would earn you $5 cash back ($100 divided by $20 equals $5). But you'd be wrong…twice. The offer requires me to first request a PayPal Cash Card, then receive it in the mail and use it at a restaurant. All within 5 weeks of first receiving the offer – some of which is spent waiting for PayPal to process my request for the card. That's a lot of effort and a short window of opportunity for a small benefit, e.g. a Fail for Offer.
PayPal could have easily avoided this by using a rolling offer expiration date. For example, PayPal could require the customer to request the card by a specific date, but then give the customer a reasonable amount of time to use the card after activation, say, 60 days. That would be clear to explain and fair to the customer -- unless, of course, the intent is to make imply the offer is more generous then it actually is.
Which leads me to the actual offer value. I read through the disclosure text a few times, and I'm pretty sure that cash back offer is on a per-transaction basis. So, while each purchase of $25 would be worth $1 cash back and a $100 dinner might net $5 cash back, four lunches adding up to $100 would be worth only $4 cash back. If I'm right, this is a Fail for Offer and Content for being misleading. If I'm wrong, it is a Fail for Content for lack of clarity.
Another Fail for Content lies in the disclosures. It appears this disclosure was rushed and not proofread. Take this paragraph, for example:
"Eligible Purchase(s)": Eligible Purchase is defined as every $20.00 USD spent in-store or onlineusing the Card and finalized by the merchant during the Offer Period (defined below) in thefollowing category: restaurants (according to the Merchant Category Code (“MCC”) assigned byeach merchant, their processor, and the credit card networks. Only acceptable MCCs for this offerare 5812 and 5814). PayPal is not responsible for assignment of MCC codes. As a result, Reward willnot be awarded if the MCC code assigned to a particular merchant does not fall within a restaurantcategory, even if you believe that the merchant is a restaurant. Eligible Purchases do not include:(1) purchases that are marked as “pending” in your Card account as of the end of the Offer Period,(2) purchases made at eligible merchants using a third-party delivery service (3) ATM transactions,(4) gift card purchases, (5) any purchase or portion of a purchase that involves a payment methodother than the Card, or (6) in-store cash withdrawals/cash back.
Spaces are missing between words. The punctuation is inconsistent. Some numbers in parentheses have spaces before them; some do not. There’s also a missing comma after "service" in the last sentence.
There are references to "e-mail" in some paragraphs and "email" in other paragraphs. According to grammarly.com, both are correct as long as you use it consistently. PayPal is not being consistent.
These types of possibly misleading offers and unclear communications suggest to me that PayPal's leadership is spending their marketing dollars without full consideration of what they are doing and how they are doing it. As a stockholder, that would frighten me. As a customer, that also scares me a bit. If I can't expect to get a clean offer and clear communication, should I really be trusting PayPal to keep my personal information secure?
Lessons:
![]() |
This recent email from PayPal trying to cross-sell Venmo merits Fails for Creative and Targeting.

Enrollment offer email, sent to long-term
Venmo customer
The email offers
me a straight cash bribe (or, as we say in marketing, an incentive) to sign up
for Venmo. The Call to Action is to click on the “Claim Your $10” link that
will bring me to the below landing page.

Landing page
lacks explanation of Venmo product features or customer benefits
The landing page
reinforces the incentive and discloses information about fees -- and allows me
to sign up for Venmo and verify my phone number.
But what is
Venmo? Neither the email nor landing page include a product explanation.
Simply put: If someone hasn’t used Venmo -- which is, after all, the kind of
person the email is targeting -- they would have no idea what it is
or why they should provide their mobile number to get $10. Both the email and
landing page should include benefit statements or at least some brief sales
messages.
Now, in fact, I
know all about Venmo. I’ve been using it for a long time, long enough for
Venmo’s parent PayPal to know that I am an active customer. That is why I give this a Fail for Targeting. There is no value in sending a new customer acquisition
offer to a long-term active customer like myself. Communications like this can
make customers question the strength of a brand.
Speaking of
brand, why doesn’t PayPal put its name behind Venmo -- at least on this
marketing email? For customers who haven’t heard of or used Venmo (like the
ones targeted by the offer), including phrasing such as “backed by PayPal” or
“a PayPal service” would at least lend some credibility to the product.
This isn’t the
first time PayPal has offered me an incentive for something without
explanation. Last year, PayPal sent me an offer for Honey that lacked a product value proposition. Nor is this the first time that PayPal has demeaned its
brand with shoddy marketing communications. These communications can implicitly
send a message to customers that PayPal doesn’t have its act together, which
could lead to decreased trust and decreased use. Is this a company to trust with cryptocurrency purchases?
Sometimes
marketing managers are so obsessed with their products, they forget the basics. That’s why they need to take a step back, review lessons like
the below, and avoid sending Mail That Fails.
Lessons:
We live in Queens -- a borough of New York City. It is also it's own county. It is not like any other borough or any other place in the world.
So to suggest that we live in nearby Brooklyn is like someone suggesting San Francisco-based DoorDash is actually in Oakland -- sure, it's nearby, but it's a different world.
I ordered from DoorDash once, although I'm not sure when or why. Maybe it was to take advantage of a credit card offer, or perhaps it was that time last year when my wife and I really, really wanted a Carvel ice cream cake but didn't feel safe taking the subway there in the middle of a pandemic. Regardless, that one order was enough to be added to their email marketing list.
DoorDash knows where I live: firmly in a Queens zip code. So, the only reason to send me an offer email with a Subject line of "Hey, Brooklyn" is to want to get a Fail for Creative. Brooklyn is a nice borough, but to suggest that we live there is insulting to those of us who can walk to the World's Fair Site or the Louis Armstrong Museum -- or can brag they live in the same borough where Peter Parker grew up with his Aunt May.
But, to suggest I live in Brooklyn? Ouch! Not even a month of free pizza could get me to say, "Fuhgeddaboutit." I'm going to just leave this picture here.
Lesson:
If you want to appeal to your customers based on locality, make sure you get their location right.
This birthday email from Hooters merits a Fail for Timing and a Fail for Creative.
The email informs the recipient that he has "10 Free Wings (Birthday)" and that his offer will expire in "1 days."
![]() |
| Hooters Birthday email arrived well after the birthday |
The recipient's birthday was in late August. He did not receive a communication about his free wings prior to his birthday or on his birthday. The first time he found out he had the opportunity to have free Hooters wings served to him (presumably by a "Hooters Girl") was on September 20 -- one day before the offer expired.
The opening of the email reads:
Just a friendly reminder that your 10 Free Wings (Birthday) is about to expire. Come in and redeem your offer before it expires in 1 days.
This brief paragraph would read better as:
Just a friendly reminder that your 10 Free Wings offer for your birthday is about to expire. Come in and redeem your offer before it expires tomorrow.
One might joke about the sentences being written by a Hooters Girl, but that would be insulting to smart women who take the job. Regardless, it appears to me that the sentence was written by a someone using rudimentary mail merge software. The first sentence identifies the type of free offer in parenthesis. The programming of the second sentence did not take into account that the number of days may be a singular number.
Let's hope the wings are better than the grammar.
Lessons:
A couple months ago I wrote about a referral offer from Freshly that merited a Fail for Creative. Last week, the company sent me a similar offer and, from a creative and user experience standpoint, it is an improvement.
![]() |
| Freshly email |
This email is personalized, addressing me by name. Although it positions the referral offer as something I had "earned" (which feels a bit gimmicky), the email does recognize both my purchase history and enthusiasm for the product.
Rather than the previous mailing -- which provided a code to share but without adequate instructions about how to use it -- this email offers a simple link with a Call to Action to "Send a Free Box." That seems easy, and needs no special codes.
The landing page includes a 3-step, easy-to-understand process for the customer to follow to give a friend a free week of Freshly.
![]() |
| Referral offer landing page |
The input fields are clear. The email message and subject lines include stock language with an opportunity to personalize. That's almost as flexible as switching next week's meal from the Cauliflower Shell Beef Bolognese to the Indian-Spiced Chickpea Curry Bowl.
One element included in the May email that is lacking here, however, is an expiration date. Instead, the email body copy mentions "... and will expire unless you share it soon ...", while the disclosure reads, "Freshly reserves the right to modify, replace, or cancel offer(s) at any time" -- a statement that lacks a sense of immediacy. This is not a Fail for Creative but is an improvement opportunity. Even if this referral offer is intended to be evergreen, I would include a soft expiration date using language such as "... so send a Freebie Box in the next 7 days and give the gift of better meals made easy!"
![]() |
| Referral offer Thank You page |
![]() |
| Email with Call to Action to buy something now |
This email from Freshly merits a Fail for Creative.
This offer is a bit different. The email recipient, a current customer, is given a "share code" to send a Freshly Freebie to someone who can get a free week of meals. Nice; however, there is no explanation of how to share. The email lacks an explanation of what I or that special someone needs to do to use that share code and enjoy that free food. This lack of explanation puts traction in the customer process of sharing, which reduces the likelihood of customer action.
The offer was sent on April 29 and expires May 6. This means the offer expires only a week after sending. The offer window is appropriately sized for an emailed offer; however, because the expiration date is mentioned only in the disclosure, the attribute of immediacy in the Call to Action is lost. The expiration date should be communicated in body copy, e.g. "Your share code is valid only through May 6, 2021, so be sure to share your Freebie today!"
Lessons: