Comparisons
What else you could use
5 honest comparisons, each including the rows where the alternative wins. Four of the five are things you would sensibly keep using alongside this.
The thing worth knowing first
Signedup is not a sending tool. It holds the list of who wants to hear about what, keeps it accurate by letting those people maintain it themselves, and hands you the current version whenever you need it. Whatever you send with today, you carry on sending with.
That makes most of the comparisons below less adversarial than a comparison page usually is. A marketing platform and an internal comms suite both send, so they solve a different half of the problem and work perfectly well alongside this. A distribution list answers a different question again, and an intranet form is the right tool for anything you are asking once. The only genuine either-or is the spreadsheet, and even there the spreadsheet wins several rows.
If the category itself is new to you, what is a preference centre? defines it without selling anything, and is the better place to start than any of the 5 below.
Start from the problem, not the product
Most of these answers are not us, and that is the point. Find the row that matches what is actually going wrong.
| What to use | |
|---|---|
| The list is out of date and nobody can fix their own row | Signedup. That is the whole problem it exists for. |
| You need to send the email as well | A marketing tool or a comms platform. This one deliberately does not send. |
| Everybody must receive it, whether they want it or not | A distribution list, kept in step with your directory. Consent is not the question. |
| You are asking one question once, with a closing date | An intranet form. It is already paid for and it is the right shape for a survey. |
| You need an app, an intranet and readership analytics | A full internal comms platform, through procurement. Buy the whole thing. |
| Fewer than fifty people, on one list, that you already keep accurate | A spreadsheet. Genuinely. Changing anything would be work for its own sake. |
| People who are rarely at a desk have to be reachable | Signedup, or paper. Almost nothing else reaches them at all. |
| You have to show what somebody agreed to, and when | Signedup. A sending tool records a send, not a decision. |
Which tool suits which problem
The list is out of date and nobody can fix their own row
Signedup. That is the whole problem it exists for.
You need to send the email as well
A marketing tool or a comms platform. This one deliberately does not send.
Everybody must receive it, whether they want it or not
A distribution list, kept in step with your directory. Consent is not the question.
You are asking one question once, with a closing date
An intranet form. It is already paid for and it is the right shape for a survey.
You need an app, an intranet and readership analytics
A full internal comms platform, through procurement. Buy the whole thing.
Fewer than fifty people, on one list, that you already keep accurate
A spreadsheet. Genuinely. Changing anything would be work for its own sake.
People who are rarely at a desk have to be reachable
Signedup, or paper. Almost nothing else reaches them at all.
You have to show what somebody agreed to, and when
Signedup. A sending tool records a send, not a decision.
The 5 comparisons
A spreadsheet
Free, immediate, and owned by one person who is never the one who knows a detail changed. The most common alternative and the only true either-or.
An Outlook or Microsoft 365 distribution list
Always right about who works here, silent on what any of them want. Keep it for anything mandatory.
Mailchimp or another marketing email tool
Good at sending, priced per contact, and offers a recipient only a way out rather than a way to change. Complementary.
An intranet form
Already paid for, already approved, already inside the network. It captures a submission rather than a preference somebody returns to.
A full internal comms platform
Email, an app, an intranet, analytics, bought by quote through procurement. If you need all of that, buy it.
The short answers
What does Signedup actually do that the others do not?
It lets the person a record describes correct that record themselves, from a link, without an account or a password, and keeps evidence of what they agreed to and when. Everything else it does follows from that one property.
Do I have to stop using what I have?
Only if what you have is a spreadsheet holding your list. Sending tools, distribution groups, intranet forms and comms platforms all do jobs this does not do, and are worth keeping.
Does it send email?
No, apart from the single-use link somebody has just asked for. It is deliberately not a sending platform, which is why it works alongside whatever you already send with.
How much does it cost?
It is published rather than quoted. Pricing depends on how many people are on your lists, counted once each however many lists they appear on, and colleagues who administer lists are unlimited and free on every plan. There is a thirty day trial that needs no card.
What is the honest weakness?
It does not send, it does not report on opens and clicks, and it does not yet integrate with a staff directory or support single sign-on. If any of those are the thing you actually need, the comparisons above say which alternative to look at instead.
Can we use it alongside the platform we already pay for?
Yes, and several of the comparisons assume you will. The list lives here and is exported to wherever you send from, which is a spreadsheet download rather than an integration. A directory sync and single sign-on are on the list of things being built, and are named as planned rather than described as available.
See it against your own list
30 days, no card, and an export button from the first day.