Cost of Over-Segmentation in Email Marketing

Here is how I turned around a 7-figure email program by simply counting how many emails we sent. Well, it wasn't that easy... but almost. The program had been declining for a few months, and the entire team was stumped. We were doing everything right. The design was impeccable, the landing pages were optimized, emails were meticulously segmented... But we missed a crucial point: segmenting is meant for personalization, NOT for sending fewer emails. The total email deliveries had dropped to almost half due to over-segmentation. Meaning we segmented out half our active subs. The worst part? The emails weren't even personalized to these hyper-segmented groups! The fix: we began broadening the segments and sending more emails, and like magic, email revenue surged to record levels. We were missing the forest for the trees. Since then, I've always kept a close eye on my count metrics alongside my efficiency metrics. After all, you can't generate email revenue if you're not sending emails.

I discovered why some brands generate 45% more revenue with 67% less work. It's not about working harder. It's about working smarter. The Two Extremes: The Perfectionist: Creates 15 micro segments, polishes copy, and design for hours and spends 4 hours per campaign, sends to 100K people, makes $6,300 The Pragmatist: Focuses on 3 high-impact segments, spends 1.5 hours per campaign, sends to 100K people, makes $5,000 Plot Twist: The Pragmatist sends 11 campaigns per month. The Perfectionist sends 6 campaigns per month. The Math: • Perfectionist: $6,300 × 6 campaigns = $37,800/month • Pragmatist: $5,000 × 11 campaigns = $55,000/month The Pragmatist generates 45% more revenue with 67% less work per campaign. The reason over-segmentation and over-polishing kills profits is because of analysis paralysis. The High-Impact Segmentation Rule: Focus on segments that move the needle, not segments that sound smart. The 3 core segments that actually matter: 1. Engaged Subscribers (80% of campaigns) • Opened/clicked in last 90-180 days • Your bread and butter audience • Highest conversion rates 2. Window Shoppers (15% of campaigns) • Recent site visitors who haven't purchased • High intent, need gentle nudge • Perfect for product spotlights 3. Winback Opportunities (5% of campaigns) • Previous customers, 30-90 days since purchase • Known buyers, just need reminding • Great for promotions and new products What to Avoid: • "VIP customers who bought red products on Tuesdays" • Gender-based segments (unless you sell gender-specific products) • Hyper-specific behavioral triggers • Segments with less than 1,000 people The Action Plan: Audit your current segments Kill anything with <1,000 subscribers Combine similar segments Focus on the big 3 Measure revenue per hour invested The Bottom Line: Perfect segmentation is the enemy of profitable segmentation. Your goal isn't to impress other marketers. It's to make money.

Is over-segmenting in Klaviyo hurting your revenue from email? Most brands still believe more segments = better results in Klaviyo. But after auditing hundreds of Klaviyo accounts, Bogdan Mihalache says: → Brands are over-segmenting themselves into tiny lists → They spend hours crafting creative and copy… ... only to send campaigns to a few thousand people who viewed a product once. The result? High effort. Low payoff. Stagnant revenue growth. Here’s the smarter approach: Segment broadly, not narrowly. → Cast a wide net to maximize the impact of your campaigns. → Focus on net list growth and revenue driven — not just keeping unsubscribes low. → "A 0.8% unsubscribe rate doesn’t pay the bills" What smart segmentation actually looks like: → Build frequency-based buckets: • High frequency (clicked in last 180 days) • Medium frequency (181–270 days) • Low frequency (271–365 days) → Adjust sending based on engagement recency — not just “Engaged 30” windows. → Use dynamic content inside campaigns instead of building 46 different micro-segments. Here’s the mindset shift you need to make: Stop obsessing over vanity metrics like open rates and unsubscribes. Start optimizing for reach, personalization inside the content, and consistent revenue growth. -------------------------- I'm curious about your Klaviyo strategy - how many segments do you have set up?

𝐒𝐞𝐠𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 ≠ 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐲. At least not the way most brands do it. They either don’t segment at all... Or they go full chaos mode with 37 micro-audiences, personalized blocks, and zero actual upside. Here’s what they forget: 𝐑𝐎𝐈 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Let’s break it down: 𝐄𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐀: You send 5 broad campaigns per week. → Each one hits ~50k people. → 1% convert = 2,500 𝐛𝐮𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐄𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐁: You send 10 hyper-segmented, ultra-personalized campaigns. → Each one hits ~5k people → 1.25% convert = 625 𝐛𝐮𝐲𝐞𝐫𝐬 Same list. More effort. 1/4 the revenue. 💡 Segmentation only works when the 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐭 outweighs the 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐩. Otherwise, you’re doing more work to sell to fewer people. So what should you do instead? Keep your segmentation: ✅ Simple enough to scale ✅ Strategic enough to make impact ✅ Smart enough to protect deliverability Start with the 20% of segments that drive 80% of performance: → 30-180 day engaged → Prospects - Customers - Vip Customers - Lapsed Customers → Active subscription customers → List hygiene/suppression segments That’s it. Build from there if there’s actual ROI upside. Not just because it sounds clever on Slack. Smart segmentation wins. Over-segmentation doesn’t.

Segmentation in email marketing is good... ... but over-segmentation? Not so much in my opinion 💡 One of the most common pitfalls in email marketing is the belief that more segmentation always equals better results. It’s a mindset rooted in classic marketing theory, but in practice, it often leads to diminished total commercial output. Here’s why: ✔️ Segmenting increases engagement rates (like click rates) because you’re targeting more precisely. ❌ But it also skyrockets production time. More segments = more newsletters to create. ❌ And often, over-segmentation means you’re reaching fewer people - missing out on potential customers who might have engaged with a broader message. Take this example: You’re launching a new product in a specific category. If you’re over-segmenting, you might only send this to people who’ve already bought from that category. But what about the customers who haven’t bought yet but are interested? Over-segmentation risks leaving them out entirely. The result? You spend more time producing content, only to limit your total impact. The key is finding the sweet spot - where segmentation boosts engagement without eating up your time or narrowing your audience too much. I’ve seen many companies fall into the over-segmentation trap because “segmentation is good” feels like an absolute truth. But good marketing is about balance, not extremes.

We all know that in email marketing, segmentation is king 👑. The more personalized, the better, right? But let’s get real. In the real world, hyper-segmentation has a cost—time, resources (= money). So where’s the line? When does segmentation actually hurt more than help? Here’s how to find the right balance 👇 👉 Cost vs. Return Segmenting down to the tiniest audience may give you better engagement, but what’s the cost? If creating that one small, ultra-specific campaign eats up hours and brings in only marginal revenue, it’s probably not worth it (a lot depends on your list size). 👉 The 80/20 Rule 80% of your revenue likely comes from 20% of your audience. If hyper-segmentation takes you away from your key revenue-driving segments, it’s time to rethink. Focus on the segments that make a difference to your bottom line, not the niche ones. 👉 Threshold for Hyper-Segmentation A good rule of thumb: If a segment accounts for less than 10% of your audience or has a low conversion rate, sending a tailored campaign might not be worth it. Broader segments with slight personalization can often perform just as well, without the extra cost. 👉 Dynamic Content to the Rescue If you want to scale personalization without over-segmenting, use dynamic content. Tailor different sections within the same email based on audience behavior, instead of sending separate emails to a dozen tiny segments. 🎯 Again, I'm talking real life, practical situations, and the majority of brands (i.e. list size < 1M). Also, I'm NOT saying not to segment (hopefully this gets through). All I'm saying is that it's probably not worth creating hyper-tailored campaigns for 8 different segments when you could have sent 2 and got the same revenue — for *most* teams where resources are limited. #DTC #Ecommerce #emailmarketing

This £57M brand tried to be data-driven with their welcome journey. Sadly, they ended up data-drowned. Here’s what happens when you take segmentation too far… JOURNEY DESCRIPTION: The users who sign up for email marketing are split like this: 1️⃣ Customers vs. Non-Customers 2️⃣ Customers further divided into: - 2a) New Subscription Customers (who signed up, and purchased a subscription after signing up) - 2b) Existing Subscription Customers (who had purchased before, but just signed up for email) - 2c) One-Time New Customers (who signed up, and placed at least one order since starting the flow) - 2d) Existing Customers (placed an order at least once, prior to starting the flow) 3️⃣ Non-Customers split by sign-up source (Popup, Footer, etc.) This setup gives granularity, allowing you to measure each subsegment's behavior and tailor messaging accordingly. Except… this is busywork disguised as strategy. Despite all these micro-segments, the messaging barely changed. The same welcome email, just delivered through an over-engineered funnel. "But you have better visibility on how these micro segments perform." So what? For example, popup sign-ups engage more than footer sign-ups. Does that mean you should shut off the footer? Next, you’re slicing traffic so much that A/B testing becomes tough. Your sample sizes shrink, your results take forever to reach significance, and in the end… you don’t learn anything actionable. Congratulations, you just made analysis impossible while optimizing for absolutely nothing. The best strategists don’t ask, ‘Can we do this?’ They ask, ‘Should we?’ Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. 🤝

Over segmentation can starve your best campaigns. Let me explain. You’ve got 100,000 subscribers. Feels good. But by the time you filter for: • Only people who clicked in the last 30 days • AND bought in the last 90 • AND viewed Product X but didn’t buy.. Now you're emailing 1,432 people. You’re trying to be smart. But your best content? It never sees the light of day. Here’s a better move: 1. Look at your highest earning flows and campaigns (based on revenue per send) 2. Pull out the big idea, the thing that actually made it work 3. Repackage it for a bigger (yes, messier) audience 4. Track what matters: net revenue vs unsubscribes Turns out, a solid email sent to 30,000 semi-interested people can crush a genius one sent to 1,000 perfect people. Segmentation is powerful but only when it doesn’t kill your reach. Remember email marketing is a numbers game and you have to find the balance of size and message.