Tim Kelsey   Feb 16 2012   Flag

The goals of the two companies are completely different. Pinterest already has you sold. Their ultimate goal is to get you to sign up for their site, which you pretty much already did when you requested an invite. The Pinterest emails are simply informative - "Thanks for signing up. Here's some more info." PC World, on the other hand, is trying to turn non-followers into followers. Do you really think their email would be effective if it just said "Like us on Facebook!" with no images or design involved? I do agree to a certain extent. Over the top design in emails can be unnecessary, but call to actions need images to be more effective. Plain text email will never cut it when there's a specific goal for the recipient.

Josh Ledgard   Feb 16 2012   Flag

I'd love to see the data for a comparison. When it comes to graphics and level of email fanciness. In the PC world case they have me... I'm following them since they have my email. Sending a mail to get me to follow a social account as the only goal is desperate and the format makes it worse. They could have sent an image of the types of things they share on the accounts and said "To see more real time news like this..." But they focussed on the fancy aspect of it. I think a clear call to action stands out when there is just one link. It's the only blue thing to click on. No distractions. :)

Martijn Oud   Feb 16 2012   Flag

I do agree on avoiding the use of images but there is nothing wrong with "fancy"; if you stick to CSS/Tables for styling. Centering an email template, giving more focus on headlines, some colour, etc. Much better then a blank email if you ask me.

Josh Ledgard   Feb 16 2012   Flag

I do agree to a point. On our own emails for http://www.kickofflabs.com we center things, use some headings, and minimal bolding for emphasis. Those mails are doing better than when we had a fancier mail template in our testing.