Home – New Forums Tech talk Email Signature – What’s your Opinion

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #972318
    AgentMail
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,741
    Up
    0
    ::

    Hi All,

    I have been thinking about setting up a fancy email signature, rather than just a plain text one. My concern is that some peoples e-mail is setup to read in text only, and others to block html content.

    Any opinions on html signatures, or ways to get around the problem?

    Thanks

    #1055462
    The Copy Chick
    Member
    • Total posts: 963
    Up
    0
    ::

    I’ve tried to include enough elements in my email signature so either one will contain enough info for the client.

    My HTML signature (below) contains contains a link to the website via the logo, plus relevant links for the social media icons.

    Emailsignature.jpg

    In plain text, it looks more like this:

    Anna Peterson

    Professional Copywriting Services

    PH – 0459 239 066
    www .copybreak.com.au

    STRATHALBYN SA 5255
    ABN: 74 472 867 104

    I figure it still gives recipients enough essential details and I’m not too worried about losing the SM icons. My web address is there and that’s probably the most important detail.

    Not sure if that helps, but it’s how I’ve opted to deal with it.

    #1055463
    Heather Cox
    Member
    • Total posts: 13
    Up
    0
    ::

    As an IT company, we deal in email a lot, and we manage a lot of mail servers, both on site and in house. We use an HTML signature on our email, and have had no signature based issues with our email being received, nor any clients having issues receiving emails with HTML signatures.

    What you might find is that recipients are asked to “right click to download picture” if you embed HTML images in your signature. This type of security has been put in place to ensure that emails aren’t rejected just because they contain links, but are converted to be less ‘threatening’ to the system.

    In my opinion, a sleek HTML signature looks very professional, where a plain HTML signature just isn’t as impressive, but either done badly will work against you (smilies are a no-no!) and might be worst than no signature at all. My preference is for minimalism, and probably because I read email almost all day I really hate backgrounds – bumps up the size of the email and makes it harder to read for no functional purpose.

    #1055464
    VideoTraining
    Member
    • Total posts: 101
    Up
    0
    ::

    An email signature is a marketing vehicle at the end of the day.

    Also, most email systems and email readers (Outlook, etc) support HTML messages/signatures by default as well.

    You just have to work out what is the right amount of information to provide. As mentioned above, usually name, contact number and website is a good start, a graphic can also be good, but you have to decide what is too much information, or if someone is going to decide that you are trying to shove too much information down their throat.

    Succinct but informative would be my recommendation.

    I hope this helps.

    Kind regards,

    TrainingGuy
    http://www.VideoTraining.com.au
    Online Computer Training Made Easy

    #1055465
    RaspberryBlack
    Member
    • Total posts: 47
    Up
    0
    ::

    Hi Carl,

    as has been said before, html-signatures usually are a good way to go and there are two ways to include images with them:
    • have them on a server
    • send them with each and every email

    I personally (and as far as I know many professionals who are dealing with email a lot) hate the second option, really. Images you send with every email (to make sure they will always be visible) just cram mailboxes and even worse: are shown as attachments.

    If you have them on a server and include them via an image tag the user might get a hint that not all images are shown in the mail. But usually they know what that means and as long as you don’t provide crucial data in that image it’s way better to let the receiver choose if he wishes to see your ornamental fluff (sorry but seen pragmatically that’s all it is) instead of forcing them to see it.

    Also I think the image you’re using at the moment is way to large… Just the logo should really be it. After all, you want your readers focus on what you write and not that monster at the bottom don’t you? If you need such a large thing for advertising reasons or whatsoever you could still choose to have 2 sigs: new leads get the monster and longer conversations something more unobstrusive. Oh and it would make sense to change the name of the image to something like “AgentMail Logo” cause at the moment it shows up as “;)

    Cheers,
    Tina

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.