Is it bad to email users inactive for 4+ years?

Email marketer from Email Geeks explains there’s a discussion to be had about reconfirming consent for users that have been inactive for an extremely long amount of time and suggests validating emails on a service like Kickbox.io if there's no proof that the users have been logging into your site/service.

Email marketer from Litmus states that keeping your email list fresh is a critical part of running a successful email program. By sending to engaged contacts, it helps improve deliverability, boost engagement rates, and drive better ROI.

Email marketer from Neil Patel Blog explains that emailing inactive subscribers can negatively impact deliverability. He advises segmenting and re-engaging them separately with targeted campaigns before removing them from your main list.

Email marketer from Email Geeks states that after four years you may as well be mailing a bought list.

Email marketer from HubSpot Blog answers that re-engaging inactive subscribers is preferable to emailing them without regard. They suggest creating a re-engagement campaign, offering an incentive to resubscribe, and gracefully removing those who don't respond.

Email marketer from Email Geeks shares that although they haven't heard specifically four years, their normal practice is to sunset users after 6 months of inactivity and to be very cautious about sending emails out to inactive audiences that haven't been communicated with in a long time. They explain that you run the risk of these individuals marking you as spam (because they don't remember you) as well as hitting recycled or pristine spam traps. They suggest to tread with caution and start with a very low volume of sends (50 maybe?) to gauge the engagement.

Email marketer from Sendinblue shares that regularly cleaning your email list and removing inactive contacts is crucial for maintaining a healthy sender reputation. They suggest implementing a sunset policy to automatically unsubscribe users who haven't engaged in a defined period.

Email marketer from Email Geeks states that hackers can't steal what you don't have and that deleting data is the best way to secure it.

Email marketer from Email Geeks shares you will want to fold those recipients in very very slowly, with a very aggressive criteria to throw them back out. Like no clicks within 2-3 sends and they are back out.

Email marketer from Email Geeks shares on the consent note raised by James, it would 100% be a good argument against emailing these people. For example in Canada under CASL, if these individuals were opted in via "implied consent" the consent expires 2 years after initially collected unless there's been an additional interaction or purchase that extended the timeline. Definitely worth looking at the initial consent/opt in piece to see where these people came from before reaching out!

Email marketer from ZeroBounce that cleaning your email list helps improve your sender reputation and email deliverability. This is because your emails are being sent to subscribers who engage with your content.

Email marketer from Reddit shares that emailing a list that old is a terrible idea. You'll likely trigger spam traps and get a lot of complaints. I would suggest that you cut that list to reduce the risk of being caught by spam filters.

Email marketer from Warrior Forum strongly advises against sending emails to lists older than a few months. They explain that the risk of spam complaints and deliverability issues is too high and not worth the potential reward.

Email marketer from Constant Contact shares that cleaning your email list leads to higher conversions, better engagement, and protects your reputation.

Email marketer from Email on Acid shares that it is essential to prune your list regularly. They recommend at least yearly, with some cases requiring more frequently. They suggest identifying and removing inactive subscribers that are not engaging. Offer an incentive to those subscribers, but remove those that are uninterested.

Email marketer from Email Geeks states if you have been consistently emailing them without their taking any action for 4 years and if those mailings are happening regularly, with CTAs, etc., and a given email has not responded at all in more than 4 years, then that's bad for bunches of reasons; and I agree with all of my colleagues who said that people keep email addresses for way longer than 4 years, so if a) Joe has had his email address for 10 years, and b) you've been emailing Joe regularly for the past 4 years, and c) Joe has not responded at all or taken any action on your email, then for the most part it's safe to assume that at best Joe is just leaving your email in his inbox unopened (which still isn't very good), or at worst Joe's email address has been repurposed as a spam trap, or somewhere in between: it's going to his spam folder and he's not seeing it, or he's deleting it without taking any action. None of these scenarios are good for you, and continuing to email Joe and others like him will not do your email reputation nor your bottom line any favors.

Expert from Word to the Wise explains that sending to old, unvalidated email address is a good way to damage your reputation and get blocked by mailbox providers. She recommends cleaning your lists regularly.

Expert from Email Geeks shares no one should be holding on to 4-year-old inactive email addresses because a larger database just makes you a larger target for internal and external hackers and data thieves, and just gives you a larger notification cost if you have to end up sending them all a postcard or sitting opposite them in a class action lawsuit when your data invariably gets into the wrong hands.

Expert from Email Geeks explains there’s also user experience to consider. If I’ve not interacted with your brand in >4 years what makes you think I won’t report your message as spam? Center the user and don’t treat them as mindless automatons that will magically buy your shit if you send them the perfect email

Expert from Spam Resource explains that sending email to old addresses could be a trap, because they might now be spam traps. It is also a waste of money sending to addresses nobody is using.

Documentation from Google Support explains that sending unwanted emails increases the chances of being marked as spam. It indicates that a high spam rate can negatively affect your sender reputation and lead to delivery issues.

Documentation from SparkPost explains that a sunset policy is a strategy for identifying and removing unengaged subscribers from your active mailing lists. It highlights the importance of setting clear criteria for inactivity and communicating with subscribers before removing them.

Documentation from Mailchimp responds that emailing inactive subscribers can hurt your deliverability. They recommend regularly cleaning your list, segmenting inactive subscribers for re-engagement, and archiving those who don't respond.

Documentation from Microsoft shares that a poor sender reputation will impact deliverability. It explains that metrics like complaint rates (spam reports) are key factors in determining sender reputation.