Is there a way to have waves prioritize certain recipients?

[kevind46959602]

Hello,

I have a campaign workflow that is scheduled to send a delivery every weekday. I am utilizing waves within the delivery to throttle the number of sends per hour. At the end of the validity period, any remaining deliveries need to be carried over to the next weekday.

Is there a way to prioritize these carry-over deliveries during the next cycle of the workflow? I am trying to create a FIFO solution for deliveries that have waves and do NOT throw away deliveries that exceed the wave/daily capacities.

Thanks in advance,

- Kevin

[Jonathon_wodnicki · Accepted solution]

Hi,

Waves are intended for IP warming, which they're not great at either- personalization is done at analysis and can get stale.

What you're describing sounds like ordinary continuous deliveries paired with broadlog check in the query, i.e. send to these recipients who are not in the broadlog schema for this delivery code.

Thanks,

-Jon

[kevind46959602]

I tried using a capacity typology rule to throttle sends per hour, but was unsuccessful. That is why waves were being used. What would be the proper approach towards implementing a throttling solution?

Also I was able to get the query working as you described. But is there a way to set recipient priority in a continuous delivery?

[Jonathon_wodnicki]

Pressure rules are a much more complex pot of stew. Recipient priority you can control with a split after the query.

Out of curiosity, what's the business case for the throttling? Is it for this specific campaign or the mta in general?

[kevind46959602]

The throttling is for a specific campaign. Different campaigns will have different throttling numbers (some none at all). This is to prevent our contact centers from becoming flooded with calls after sending out emails.

[Jonathon_wodnicki]

Interesting. Sounds like drip-style campaign with split prioritization fits the bill then.