# SPAM - An Interesting Statistic



## mosaix (Jan 16, 2009)

How many responses, in terms of responses per million, do you need in order for the sending of SPAM e-mails to be profitable?

BTW I'm not thinking of setting up a SPAMMING organisation - I know the answer. I'm just wondering what how many people know the real figure.


----------



## PTeppic (Jan 17, 2009)

About 1/8th according to BBC NEWS | Technology | Study shows how spammers cash in, i.e. one response in every 12.5 million message.

What gets me is that there are still people clicking the links for viagra, bodily extensions, lottery wins and to help transfer the 25 million dollars from some unfortunate widow in Nigeria. Surely it's just a mixture of greed and naivety (or stupidity) on the part of the computer users?


----------



## mosaix (Jan 18, 2009)

Absolutely correct PTeppic. Just one spam in 12.5 million has to draw a response in order to make the exercise worthwhile.


----------



## Highlander II (Jan 18, 2009)

What is the definition of 'response' in this case?  Opening the e-mail?  Clicking a link?  Purchasing a product?

I'm asking b/c I don't send SPAM e-mails, so I don't know what they consider a 'response'. =)


----------



## PTeppic (Jan 18, 2009)

I believe from reading the piece, and apologies to Mosaix for having seen the report when it first came out, that "response" means replying with interest.

Some people DO actually want to play online casinos, to make themselves bigger, more (ahem) active and/or, unfortunately, every month or two I'm sad to see someone admitting in the press they've lost tens of thousands of pounds having "won the lottery" or tried to help a poor little widow from Nigeria access her dead husband's funds, etc.


----------



## iansales (Jan 18, 2009)

PTeppic said:


> About 1/8th according to BBC NEWS | Technology | Study shows how spammers cash in, i.e. one response in every 12.5 million message.



Your maths is off. 1/8th means 1 out of 8, not 1 out of 12.5 million.


----------



## purple_kathryn (Jan 18, 2009)

and clearly some stranger who has sent you and a whole other lot of people an email is trustworthy enough to purchase products from.

I had a new twist on the Nigerian thing the other day.  A Captain from the US army had "found" some valuable treasures while serving in Iraq.  Now yes it might be stealing but they have to put up with suicide bombers so it's morally justified stealing.  He has it all converted to cash but he needs me to hold the money for him until he gets back.

I really really don't get how people fall for these.


----------



## mosaix (Jan 18, 2009)

iansales said:


> Your maths is off. 1/8th means 1 out of 8, not 1 out of 12.5 million.



It's the 1/8th that's wrong the 1 out of 12.5 million is correct.

_While running their spam campaigns the researchers sent about 469 million junk e-mail messages. The vast majority of these were for the fake pharmacy campaign. 
_
_"After 26 days, and almost 350 million e-mail messages, only 28 sales resulted," wrote the researchers. _
_The response rate for this campaign was less than 0.00001%. This is far below the average of 2.15% reported by legitimate direct mail organisations. 
_
_"Taken together, these conversions would have resulted in revenues of $2,731.88—a bit over $100 a day for the measurement period," said the researchers. 
_
_Scaling this up to the full Storm network the researchers estimate that the controllers of the vast system are netting about $7,000 (£4,430) a day or more than $2m (£1.28m) per year. _


----------



## AE35Unit (Jan 23, 2009)

I get weird stuff like in emails. the fron part will be advertising some service that seems genuine, then you find this kind of stuff at the bottom:

"For example, the wheelbarrow behind the avocado pit indicates that the flatulent cloud formation gives secret financial aid to an industrial complex. If a dreamlike maelstrom usually gives a pink slip to the overpriced bowling ball, then some pig pen beyond a power drill trembles. Some mating ritual hibernates, or a shabby tornado recognizes a cocker spaniel. Most people believe that a dolphin around a microscope gives secret financial aid to the barely bohemian maelstrom, but they need to remember how lazily the mastadon meditates. For example, a fire hydrant defined by a tornado indicates that the tabloid of the turkey almost avoids contact with a polygon."


----------



## mosaix (Jan 23, 2009)

AE35Unit said:


> I get weird stuff like in emails. the fron part will be advertising some service that seems genuine, then you find this kind of stuff at the bottom:
> 
> "For example, the wheelbarrow behind the avocado pit indicates that the flatulent cloud formation gives secret financial aid to an industrial complex. If a dreamlike maelstrom usually gives a pink slip to the overpriced bowling ball, then some pig pen beyond a power drill trembles. Some mating ritual hibernates, or a shabby tornado recognizes a cocker spaniel. Most people believe that a dolphin around a microscope gives secret financial aid to the barely bohemian maelstrom, but they need to remember how lazily the mastadon meditates. For example, a fire hydrant defined by a tornado indicates that the tabloid of the turkey almost avoids contact with a polygon."



It's to try and confuse you SPAM filter, AE35. Strangely enough it doesn't seem to work.


----------



## Vladd67 (Jan 23, 2009)

With regards to the Nigerian emails and their ilk, there are people out there who gladly reply in fact they go out of their way to encourage them. Its called 419 Baiting
Welcome to the 419 Eater


----------



## Dave (Jan 23, 2009)

Vladd67 said:


> With regards to the Nigerian emails and their ilk, there are people out there who gladly reply in fact they go out of their way to encourage them.


And then there is George Agdgdgwngo...
Fonejacker - E4.com


----------



## Ursa major (Jan 23, 2009)

mosaix said:


> How many responses, *in terms of responses per million*, do you need in order for the sending of SPAM e-mails to be profitable?


 
Actually, put in the terms for which the question asked, the answer is *0.08* responses per million.


----------



## kythe (Jan 23, 2009)

I didn't know all of this about spam since I'm used to just ignoring it.  

I just checked out the 419 baiting site that Vladd67 provided.  It's an interesting idea and very educational about how and why spammers work, but I'm skeptical about whether "baiting" the spammers to distract them from real victims is a solution.  Since the site seems to reveal their baiting strategies online, what stops spammers from reading the site and counteracting baiters' methods?  And most importantly, how do baiters know that what they are doing is really effective at thwarting spammers?  They may inadvertantly end up doing the opposite - motivating spammers to improve their methods.


----------



## Vladd67 (Jan 23, 2009)

Its not a solution, its just a bit of fun in fact some people appear to have made a crusade out of it
scambuster419.co.uk: where 419 scam artists meet their match
http://www.419baiter.com/


----------



## kythe (Jan 24, 2009)

Hmmm.  I tend to prefer the approach "Don't feed the trolls".


----------



## dustinzgirl (Jan 24, 2009)

kythe said:


> Hmmm.  I tend to prefer the approach "Don't feed the trolls".



I have one email I use to sign up for things, so when I get the occasional spammer I like to reply with extreme nastiness. Its really good for relieving tension. I recommend it.


----------



## kythe (Jan 24, 2009)

dustinzgirl said:


> I have one email I use to sign up for things, so when I get the occasional spammer I like to reply with extreme nastiness. Its really good for relieving tension. I recommend it.


 
 

You have a point.


----------



## Dave (Jan 24, 2009)

You should never reply. Most of the time these speculative emails have no idea if your email address is still active (or ever existed at all.) (You will often get a spam email that has a string of 'copied to' that looks like they read a phone directory.) When you reply to them, then they immediately know that the address is active, and you will get put on a list leading to even more directed spam. Just ignore it, or if it is a scam forward it to the relevant 'ISP' using abuse@ISP.com replacing ISP with the relevant ISP obviously.


----------

