I don't understand why people send spam. Don't they understand that 90% of emails are just deleted? I am not interested in viagra or fake rolexs.

Why don't companies start sending normal junk mail that you get in your mail box and put it in email form? Wouldn't that save money? I know I would read it and it would save trees

they do it because it's easy to do & as such costs them very little. if even 90% get instantly ignored/deleted (& i think it would be more like 99.9%) then thats still some that click the links... profit.

It's easy to sit there and say you'd like to have more money. And I guess that's what I like about it. It's easy. Just sitting there, rocking back and forth, wanting that money.

Some people just want to offer friendly stock tips

Because different companies use different lists... the companies that send you mail in the post probably don't have your email address, and their marketing department probably don't consider emails to be as affective a method of advertising as a real life catalog/flyer/donation beg form.

does ur cock hard enough?

I'd like more spam like Spermamax, because its always hilarious

Laugh trog with the spermamax.

Our company mail server became the target of such spam and whenever I'm feeling down at work I just have to check my junk email folder for some laughs and all is ok again ;)

i have like 1300 spam items in my gmail spam folder. i don't even bother checking that folder anymore. i used to check it wondering if it might have trapped some legit emails but now i can't be f***ed.

If you could only charge spam senders a fee for every email you block

So this may rise from the ashes: http://www.spamusement.com/

Because different companies use different lists... the companies that send you mail in the post probably don't have your email address

Also, we tend to be more likely to read postal junk mail because it is more relevant to us. It is more relevant because the company sending it has spent some money working out who their junk mail is relevant to, because it costs (compared to spam) a relatively large amount per item to deliver.

For example if you live in a Brisbane/Gold Coast/Sunshine Coast suburb that is within easy travel of a Coles supermarket, you will recieve the Metro QLD edition of the coles flyer each week. That is because you fit the profile of someone who might realistically travel to a metro QLD coles to shop.

I think that the only reason that this sort of targeting works so well for postal junk mail is that generally all the junkmail in your letter box is targetted to some extent, and so you can be confident that most of it will be partially relevant and some of it will actually be of interest to you, so you might actually look at it. That is, by targeting, the advertiser might actually increase number of readers.

Unfortunately, we can't be similarly confident about spam. Everyone knows that 99% of it is untargeted advertising broadcast as widely as possible and as cheaply as possible, usually because the market for the product is small, hard to identify and expensive to target. Since nobody has the expectation that any of the spam they get will be relevant, they filter and delete all of it before reading any of it. So any money spent trying to target a particular market with email is wasted.

In short, compared to spam, postal junk mail in most cases costs a little more, but works far better, making it the option of choice for most businesses. Only when the market for the product is incredibly specialised AND hard to identify is the cost of doing postal junk mail right too prohibitive.

Also, we tend to be more likely to read postal junk mail because it is more relevant to us.

that and it doesn't contain viruses.

tru dat^ unless it's like anthrax or something... i watch too much 24