MailChimp are just spam enablers. The vast majority of e-mail I get from them is to e-mail addresses that definitely never ever signed up for anything. They claim they use double opt in, but that's just a damn dirty lie. Furthermore, they are past masters at helping their spammers craft their spam to defeat SpamAssassin and baysian filters, so the spam that actually makes it to my inbox is disproportionately from the…
Mailchimp's pricing
31–40 of 89 posts
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#32Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#33I started out using mailchimp when I had less than 2000 subscribers. It worked great! But now that my mail list is growing, I find it increasingly expensive. Any recommendations on alternative providers?
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sendgrid, they have a far more sensible pricing structure based on no. of emails sent, which doesn't get expensive till you're truly at a larger scale. Sending 2000 mails a month should not cost $30 in my opinion. There are plenty of options though.
But they are a bit different. MailChimp is about marketing emails, that's why 2000 - it's the number of subscribers, not emails. On paying accounts they have no limit to the number of emails sent. SendGrid gravitate more to transactional emails, and they limit number of emails sent per month. So choosing between them isn't that trivial.
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#35I think I would much rather roll out my own solution using Mailgun/Amazon's API with a basic RoR/Golang prototype than use these shady monkeys. It's their business and they have every right to price it the way they see it fit, but when there's something deceptive going on, as an end user I think I have every reason to point it out. For example, when you start with a free plan and you decide to upgrade to a paid plan,…
I use Sendy[0] for this very reason. It uses Amazon's SES and whilst it isn't as feature full as Mailchimp it does the job, costs about $60. Note, I'm not affiliated in any way I just started to use it as I needed auto-responders and Mailchimp was too expensive for my use-case. [0] http://sendy.co/
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#36That is the mother of all pricing tables. It almost looks like a parody.
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#37MailChimp are just spam enablers. The vast majority of e-mail I get from them is to e-mail addresses that definitely never ever signed up for anything. They claim they use double opt in, but that's just a damn dirty lie. Furthermore, they are past masters at helping their spammers craft their spam to defeat SpamAssassin and baysian filters, so the spam that actually makes it to my inbox is disproportionately from the…
If you saw it from the other end, in the eyes of a legitimate customer, you'd realise how laughable that is. MailChimp discourages spam to the extent that it's actually difficult to send email to your own customers! I can assure you that they use double opt-in, unless a customer has imported a list which they are trusted to only do legitimately. FWIW, I cannot remember having ever received any spam from MailChimp.
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#38I think the real thing here is: 0 - 500 $10 unlimited 501 - 1,000 $15 1,001 - 1,050 $20 // $5 = 50 emails 1,051 - 1,150 $25 //$5 = 100 emails 1,151 - 2,500 $30 //$5 = 1350 emails 2,501 - 2,600 $35 // $5 = 100 emails
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#39That is the mother of all pricing tables. It almost looks like a parody.
This is special page for 'all' pricing, real users page is much better.
Re: Mailchimp's pricing
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they are a bit different. MailChimp is about marketing emails, that's why 2000 - it's the number of subscribers, not emails. On paying accounts they have no limit to the number of emails sent. SendGrid gravitate more to transactional emails, and they limit number of emails sent per month. So choosing between them isn't that trivial.
Unless you have a tiny number of subscribers, I think someone charging by emails sent is better value, but even without that, the step between 2000 on a list free, and 500 on a list paid for, seems somewhat bizarre, they should eliminate that.