Continued from page 1
One is not better than other because they both serve two totally different purposes.
In my opinion, RSS is better for reaching a large list of subscribers because it is 100% spam proof and puts control into hands of consumer.
Why fight spam filters when you can avoid them altogether?
Internet marketers that think they are "more in control" by using email instead of RSS are somewhat disillusioned. Consumers can unsubscribe to your email list any time they want to. If they try to unsubscribe from your list but can't, then you are spamming them.
If you truly offer valuable content, consumers will look forward to getting your messages whether they come by email or RSS.
Considering fact that a good number of emails are getting blocked by spam filters, you have a better chance of reaching more of your subscribers via RSS.
With that said, email will always be necessary on an individual basis so you can have two-way communication.
RSS was never made for that, and will never fill that role. But RSS can reach a large group of spectators with a 100% delivery guarantee. And that is something email just can't match!
Now you can bypass the spam filters altogether by delivering your newsletter via personalized RSS feed! Kent Thompson's new software makes it too easy. Check it out! http://feedmagic.com/fm/?will-rss-replace-email