Helder Correia wrote: >Tracy Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>If telemarking and spam wasn't profitable, THEY WOULDN'T DO IT! > >I don't know about telemarketing, but I don't think that spam itself >has *ever* been profitable. As far as I've heard, the only people who >make money off of spam are those who sell the mailing lists to spammers.
That's the way it's always worked... The people who made money in the gold rush were those who sold supplies to the miners. The people who made money in the settling of the Great Plains sold farm equipment to the farmers. On the other hand, *some* of those miners and farmers did actually make money... a few even struck it rich. (That's what keeps people buying lottery tickets.) Unfortunately, in this case, a spammer that gets rich has done it by taking a few bucks out of a million people's pocketbooks to do it. Ironically, just as this discussion came up, I've had a round of BS with my email address provider about going over my 150-a-day mailbox limit. (I haven't, but that's another story.) They want me to upgrade, doubling the price of bouncing my email to me. It appears that spam might indeed take some $$ directly out of my pocket. ___________________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe send a mail message with a SUBJECT line of "unsubscribe" to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
