This morning in my inbox was a very well thought out email newsletter from a well known computer manufacturer. One that I don’t recall subscribing to. And for a moment I thought… they’re “spamming” me!

Now, it so happens that I know enough about this company’s approach to know that simply isn’t the case. And I’d had my second cup of coffee, so I was moderately rational. The truth is that at some point, for some reason, I gave this company permission to email me. And I forgot.

My best guess is that I most likely subscribed between 3 and 6 months ago.For whatever reason, I haven’t received anything from this company since. Until today. By which time not only is my reason for subscribing moot, my memory is faded also! So by the time I did receive anything, it was perceived as spam.

I unsubscribed. But here’s the rub - had I actually received something of value at the time the company and it’s products were of interest, I would probably still be a subscriber today.

Getting permission just isn’t enough. Communicate with your list regularly, beginning very shortly after the initial subscription. If you don’t, the original permission is nullified. (OK, probably not legally. But in your subcriber’s mind, most definitely.)

Google this week introduced a new search service for scholars, aimed at improving the search-ability of educational documents on the Internet. The beta release does not incorporate Adwords.

Check it out at scholar.google.com

Read some interesting stats on spam today. Jeremy Jaynes, currently being prosecuted under his state’s anti-spam laws, is reported to have earned as much as $750,000 a month for his efforts - an estimated net profit of nearly $700,000 a month.

Another spam-related article mentions a surge of spam offering salvation and beseeching recipients to accept Jesus as their saviour. The article doesn’t mention if, like the television ministries, these email ministries are soliciting donations to help fund their religious agendas. But, if Jaynes’ P&L is anything to go by, it’s only a matter of time…

Online marketing giant Doubleclick announced last week that it has hired investment banking firm Lazard to “consider strategic options” and admits that those options may include a sell-off of business units. Analysts cite price competition as being a key reason for the company’s failure to perform in line with expectations.

Of particular interest to direct marketers will be the impact on DartMail, DoubleClick’s answer to permission email marketing technologies.