Latest / The Email Marketing Podcast with Fexingo: Newsletters, Open Rates, and Subscriber Growth / Why Low Email Frequency Beats High Volume in 2026
Transcript
- Lucas: So let's start with a number that stopped me cold this week. The 2026 Subscriber Sentiment Index — it's a survey of about 5,000 consumers — found that 73 percent of people have unsubscribed from an email list purely because the brand sent too often. Not because the content was bad. Not because they lost interest in the product. Just... too many emails. Luna: Yeah, that's a brutal stat. And I think a lot of marketers see it coming but keep pushing volume because they're measured on sends. Lucas: Exactly. And the irony is, the more you send, the more you train subscribers to ignore you. There's a concept called 'email fatigue' — it's not just that people get annoyed, it's that their brain literally starts treating your subject line as noise. You're competing for attention against a dozen other senders, and if you're the loudest one, you get filtered out fastest. Luna: So what's the alternative? I mean, some brands thrive on daily emails — news outlets, deal sites. Is this a blanket rule or more nuanced? Lucas: It's nuanced, but the data is pretty clear that for most brands — especially B2C retail and services — there's a sweet spot. The same survey found that brands sending 2 to 4 emails per week had the highest engagement rates. Anything over 5 per week and open rates dropped by about 15 percent on average. Luna: And yet so many retailers are sending 7, 10, sometimes 15 emails a week during peak seasons. I've personally unsubscribed from a few clothing brands that went from a weekly newsletter to daily blasts overnight. Lucas: I think that's the trigger — the sudden jump. The Subscriber Sentiment Index also asked about 'frequency surprises', and 61 percent said they'd unsubscribe if a brand increased frequency without warning. So it's not just the volume, it's the broken expectation. Luna: Right. So if you're going to increase frequency, you need to tell people why and maybe let them opt into a higher-frequency version. That's where preference centers become key. Lucas: Preference centers are underused. Most brands have them, but they don't actually promote them. A study from Litmus last year showed that only 12 percent of subscribers ever interact with a preference center after signing up. But the ones who do — their churn rate is something like 40 percent lower. Luna: So the solution isn't just 'send less', it's 'give subscribers control over how much they get'. That makes sense. Let people choose their own frequency. Lucas: Exactly. And there's a great case study from REI, the outdoor gear co-op. Back in 2024, they were sending about 6 promotional emails a week. Their open rates had slid to around 18 percent. So they made a decision: cut promotional email volume by 40 percent — down to about 3 to 4 per week. Luna: And what happened? I'm guessing it didn't hurt revenue. Lucas: It actually improved it. Within six months, their click-through rates on promotional emails went up by 22 percent. Unsubscribes dropped by 12 percent. And revenue from email — which had been flat for two years — grew by 8 percent year-over-year. They sent fewer emails and made more money. Luna: That's a perfect counterexample to the 'more is more' mindset. But I also wonder if this works for every industry. What about SaaS? I get daily emails from some B2B tools and they're actually useful. Lucas: For SaaS and content-heavy brands, frequency can be higher because the value is more consistent. But even there, the principle holds: if you're sending daily, make sure each email has a specific purpose. One of the B2B newsletters I subscribe to — Morning Brew, for example — sends once a day and it's exactly the right cadence. They never send a second email unless there's a real breaking story. Luna: So the key is consistency and intent. Not just 'we have the list so let's send something'. Lucas: Right. And I think part of the problem is that email marketers are often judged on volume metrics — total sends, list size — rather than engagement. If your bonus is tied to total email revenue, you might be tempted to send more. But the data shows that engagement metrics like open rate and click rate correlate way better with long-term subscriber value. Luna: So a brand that's currently sending 7 emails a week — what would be your advice? Cut to 4 cold turkey, or taper down? Lucas: I'd say cut to 4, but announce it. Send one email explaining: 'We're reducing our frequency to bring you only the most useful content. If you miss hearing from us more often, you can update your preferences here.' That way, you're framing it as a benefit, not a loss. And you're giving the super-engaged subscribers an off-ramp to stay at the higher cadence if they want. Luna: That's smart. It also creates a positive brand impression — like, 'this company respects my inbox'. That's rare these days. Lucas: And it's measurable too. You can track how many people opt into the higher-frequency option. If it's less than 5 percent, you know most people are fine with the lower cadence. If it's over 20 percent, maybe your content is more valuable than you thought and you can keep the higher frequency for that segment. Luna: So it's really about segmentation by frequency preference. That's a whole other layer of personalization. Lucas: Exactly. And the technology to do this is cheap — most ESPs have preference centers built in. It's more about the mindset shift. You have to trust that sending less can actually grow your business. Luna: I think that's hard for a lot of marketers because they're used to thinking of email as a volume game. Send more, get more clicks, make more sales. But the data is showing that the opposite is true for retention. Lucas: Yeah, and it's worth noting that the Subscriber Sentiment Index also found that 48 percent of consumers said they'd be more likely to make a purchase from a brand that sends fewer, more relevant emails. So there's a direct revenue incentive to be more selective. Luna: Alright, so low frequency is the new high performance. But what about the actual content of those fewer emails? Should they be longer, more educational, more promotional? Lucas: That's a great question. The research suggests that when you reduce frequency, each email has to deliver more value. So you might shift from a purely promotional email to a mix of education, community content, and offers. REI, for example, started including more user-generated content — photos and stories from members — in their reduced cadence. That actually boosted click-through rates on the content sections by 15 percent. Luna: So it's not just less, it's better. And better means more focused on what the subscriber actually wants. Lucas: Exactly. And one way to figure out what they want is to ask. A simple survey — 'what topics do you want to hear about?' — can be incredibly effective. But that's a whole other episode. Luna: We've actually done that one, I think. Episode 51, on surveys. Lucas: Right, right. So today we're really honing in on frequency. And I want to leave listeners with a concrete action step: look at your own email send frequency over the last 90 days. If you're sending more than 4 promotional emails per week, try a 30-day test where you cut to 3. Measure open rate, click rate, unsubscribe rate, and revenue. I bet you'll see a net positive. Luna: And if you're already at a low frequency but still seeing fatigue? Maybe check your subject line variety or the time of day you're sending. There are other levers. Lucas: Absolutely. But frequency is the lever most people ignore because it feels counterintuitive. And it's the one that often gives you the biggest bang for the least effort. Luna: Alright, so before we wrap, I want to bring up something that's been on my mind. We talk a lot on this show about tools and tactics that can genuinely improve your marketing — and a lot of you have told us that these conversations have sparked real changes in your campaigns. It's actually the reason we keep doing this. Lucas: Yeah, and it's also why we keep the show ad-free. A couple of dollars a month from listeners who find value in it — that's what really sustains it. If you've ever gotten a useful idea from an episode, you can support us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It makes a real difference in keeping the lights on. Luna: Absolutely. And it helps us avoid having to run ads, which we'd rather not do. So thank you to anyone who's already contributed — it genuinely keeps us going. Lucas: Alright, back to the topic. One more thing I want to touch on is the role of re-engagement campaigns when you've already been sending too much. If you've burned your list with high frequency, what do you do? Luna: Right, because cutting frequency alone won't fix a list that's already tuned you out. You need to win back their attention. Lucas: Exactly. A simple re-engagement sequence — maybe three emails over two weeks — that asks 'do you still want to hear from us?' can recover about 10 to 15 percent of disengaged subscribers. The key is to set expectations for the new, lower frequency in that sequence. So you're not just apologizing, you're resetting the relationship. Luna: And if they don't engage, it's better to let them go. A smaller, more engaged list is more valuable than a large, unresponsive one. Lucas: That's the core takeaway from this episode. Frequency is not just a tactical decision — it's a strategic one that signals how much you respect your subscribers' time. And the brands that respect that time are the ones that see the highest lifetime value. Luna: Well said. And on that note, I think we've covered a lot of ground. For those of you testing the 30-day frequency cut, let us know how it goes. We'd love to hear your results. Lucas: Absolutely. Drop us a note or tag us. Until next time, keep your inbox clean and your content sharp.