Iterable

Commentaires: This product helps us daily with our email marketing needs.

Avantages: What I like is since I started using Iterable, the product has been evolving and getting more innovative. I enjoy the workflow section on the UI. I enjoy when my team needs product enhancements, they are willing to hear our needs out and work on improving. I like the great customer success team and always helping us. Finally, the upper management and when in need being available to get in discussion with any further needs we might have.

Inconvénients: I would really like the segmentation piece to be improved. I would like to work with Iterable on needs here as I have found many flaws that I have iterated, but yet not gotten solved. Like searching for a number of campaigns that are similar all at once instead of doing OR's with tons of campaign ids. To be able to query a full workflow.

Commentaires: Overall, I would definitely recommend Iterable. As much as SFMC and others have dominated the market, their data structures and backend setup are more archaic and not easily scalable without custom implementation (SFMC frequently has to shuffle databases around based on client volume since many share instances and the larger ones can take an entire instance down). Although I think Iterable has some catching up to do in terms of more robust customization capabilities, and certain platform capabilities, I still think it's an innovative new tool that has a promising future to bring more powerful function than the old school platforms can keep up with.

Avantages: The interface is intuitive and easy to use. Having no prior experience, I was able to jump in quickly and navigate through setting up an email blast within a day. The object based data setup is also easy and intuitive to understand, despite coming from a traditional "relational tables" platform and background.

Inconvénients: There are certain key features of an Email Platform that I find lacking for Iterable. Nothing show stopping, but things that I would have thought would be intuitively built in: no auto-suppression can be applied based on send classification (transactional vs. marketing), basic date comparison logic is not available (should be easy for eng to build, given they just need to set additional functions), no re-usable global content blocks available (think of SFMCs Content Areas, where you can house snippets of code, or static html, and wherever needed pull that content in to multiple emails, without having to recreate the same code over and over again - universal footer, header, etc).

Avantages: It has a slew of options and ways of creating audiences and targeting users via categories, funnels, actions and events. The API is very complex and a bit difficult to use if you don't contact the support every day.

Inconvénients: Little documentation and long waiting times for tickets and support requests.

Commentaires: Automatic blame deflection of any issues we've raised, canned responses and total failure to meet promised value

Avantages: Cart abandoner targeting promised, non-engineer self-service of complex marketing and retargeting campaigns.

Inconvénients: Blaming Segment for failure to merge anonymous events with identified users, blaming Segment for integration failures that caused significant loss of data. Awful limitations of workflows. No ability of non-engineers to actually successfully self-service on pretty much any features. Zero interest on actually enabling us to leverage the service to create value

Avantages: We chose Iterable based on the strength of its API and its ability to handle a multi-million list size. As a marketer, Iterable has a number of powerful advanced features that make it easy for me to perform segmentation, write workflows and run multivariate tests. The support team is beyond amazing; they are knowledgeable and go out of their way to ensure their customers succeed.

Inconvénients: Our engineers get a bit frustrated about some of the technical limitations. For example, certain types of API calls are currently centered around the individual user vs. a particular list (meaning that Iterable is designed to ping your server X million times for each user on a list vs. 1 X for the list itself). That said, the Iterable product team is very responsive to customer feedback, and this shortcoming is on the short-term roadmap to be fixed.