Migration Briefing Email Editor NEA → NUNI FY27

Mailchimp Email Editor Migration: Where We Are, What It Has Cost, and How to Finish

Author: R&A PM team • Last updated: May 11, 2026 • Data window: May 2024 – May 2026 (24 months) • Pipeline date: 2026-05-11

View Toggle to see metrics & charts in either lens

Executive Summary

Among paid customers, NUNI leads at 58.1% adoption, but the migration has stalled exactly where the money is. The remaining paid NEA base is $566M ARR, with $281M ARR concentrated in 38,145 HVC accounts. CSAT did not improve with migration — CES dropped 0.10 points, paid-customer badge sentiment is 94.7% negative (worse than Free), and 225K users have already tried NUNI and reverted to NEA. We need a phased, parity-gated migration — not a forced flip — to land this without losing the HVC top of the funnel.

Across all editor users (Free + Paid), NUNI leads at 62.5% adoption, but the migration has stalled exactly where the money is. The remaining NEA base is $566M ARR of paid revenue with $281M ARR concentrated in 38,145 HVC accounts. Customer satisfaction did not improve with migration — CES dropped, badge sentiment is 93% negative for 8 straight quarters, and 225,784 users have already tried NUNI and reverted to NEA. We need a phased, parity-gated migration — not a forced flip — to land this without losing the HVC top of the funnel.

Top metrics

58.1%

Paid NUNI adoption (532,884 of 917,145 paid users)

41.9%

Paid users still on NEA (384,261)

$566M

Remaining paid NEA ARR ($47.16M MRR × 12)

$281M

HVC ARR concentration on NEA (38,145 users)

3.90 / 4.00

CES on NUNI vs NEA — migration worsened effort

94.7%

Paid-customer badge feedback negative or very-negative

225,784

Reverters across all users (8–10% of editor-flippers)

$1.32M

ARR already lost to editor-cited churn (24mo)

62.5%

NUNI adoption (1.97M of 3.16M editor users)

37.5%

Remaining on NEA (1.19M users)

$566M

ARR on remaining NEA paid base ($47.16M MRR × 12)

$281M

HVC ARR concentration on NEA ($23.4M MRR × 12)

3.90 / 4.00

CES on NUNI vs NEA — migration worsened effort

93%

Badge feedback negative or very-negative (24mo)

225,784

Reverters: tried NUNI then went back to NEA

$1.32M

ARR already lost to editor-cited churn (24mo)

Five things a senior exec must take away

The HVC funnel is closed. Monthly first-time HVC migrations dropped 91% — from 10,930 in May 2024 to 898 in April 2026. The remaining 38,145 HVC users are self-selecting as NEA-permanent. Free + Paid<$299 absorbs 98% of new migration volume; HVC is essentially flat-lining.
CSAT got worse, not better. Independent CES survey of 8,201 responses shows NUNI is 0.10 points lower on customer effort (3.90 vs 4.00). Bottom-box "hard to use" share inflated 52% relative (6.8% → 10.4%). Paid customers are more negative on NUNI than Free users (94.7% vs 89.4% badge sentiment) — the migration hurt your highest-value customers most.Sentiment-tagged badge feedback over 24 months is 93% negative, with no quarter-over-quarter improvement.
$281M ARR is concentrated in just 38K HVC accounts — 56% of them on the grandfathered Legacy Monthly plan ($150M ARR slice). These are 7-10-year-tenured power users with 3× more lifetime campaign history and 14× more RSS-driven workflows than NUNI HVCs. A forced migration without parity is a direct churn lever on this revenue.
Editor-cited churn already cost us $1.32M ARR, and that's the conservative floor. Adjusted for hidden signal, the realistic upper bound is $3.96M ARR lost to editor-cited churn in 24 months. Velocity doubled after the late-2024 default-flip.
The fix is sequencing, not speed. A 3-phase, parity-gated playbook can mitigate $60M ARR (Phase 1) + $122M ARR (Phase 2) = $182M ARR (32% of paid NEA base) in 9 months at low risk, then preserve the remaining $281M HVC ARR via a hybrid (NEA + NUNI co-availability) track for 18 months. Forcing without sequencing risks $23–28M ARR in HVC churn.

Decision asks (one slide)

Approve the 3-phase plan

Phase 1 default-flip on Free + low-paid by month 3. Phase 2 nudge on paid power-users + non-Legacy HVC by month 9 (parity-gated). Phase 3 hybrid + concierge for Legacy/HVC through month 18.

Fund Q1 the top-5 parity gaps

Save/version reliability, image controls, brand kit/font palette restoration, preview-test reliability, AI Creative Assistant restoration. Without these, Phase 2 cannot start without bleeding HVC MRR.

Accept hybrid carry cost for HVC

Maintain NEA codebase availability for 38K HVC + 92K Legacy plan customers for 18 more months. Carry cost is bounded; protected ARR is $281M. Forcing instead loses up to $28M ARR.

1. Situation — Where the migration is today

Mailchimp has been migrating customers from the NEA (legacy/classic) email editor to NUNI (new email editor) for several years. As of the most recent BI snapshot (pipeline date 2026-05-11):

Editor share — paid customers only

NUNI (new)

532,884 (58.1%)

NEA (legacy)

384,261 (41.9%)

917,145 paid customers with editor signal. Paid NEA ARR: $566M. Paid NUNI ARR: $595M. Total paid editor ARR: $1.16B.

Paid editor share by tier

Tier	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share	NEA ARR
Paid <$299	346,116	497,920	41.0%	$285M
HVC ($299+ MRR)	38,145	34,964	52.2%	$281M
Total paid	384,261	532,884	41.9%	$566M

Adoption inverts at HVC: NEA leads in every paid bucket above $299.

Editor share — overall (Free + Paid)

NUNI (new)

1,973,288 (62.5%)

NEA (legacy)

1,185,017 (37.5%)

3.16M accounts with editor signal (of 4.43M external accounts). The remaining ~1.27M never created an email and are excluded from share.

Editor share by tier (Free + Paid)

Tier	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share
Free	800,756	1,440,404	35.7%
Paid <$299	346,116	497,920	41.0%
HVC ($299+ MRR)	38,145	34,964	52.2%

Adoption inverts at HVC: NEA leads in every MRR bucket above $299.

The migration trend tells the story

Monthly first-time NUNI migrators — paid customers only (24 months)

Period	Paid <$299 / month	HVC / month	Paid total / month	Read-out
2024 Q3 avg	23,649	3,053	26,702	Steady-state baseline
2025 Q1 avg	18,647	1,765	20,412	HVC drops 42% YoY
2025 Q2 avg	17,488	1,499	18,987	Free default-flip rolled out — but paid migration kept declining
2025 Q4 avg	22,565	1,352	23,917	Paid rebounded slightly; HVC kept declining
2026 Q1 avg	19,106	1,031	20,137	HVC at 91% decline vs 2024 baseline
April 2026	16,959	898	17,857	HVC paid funnel essentially closed

Monthly first-time NUNI migrators — Free + Paid (24 months)

Period	Free / month	Paid<$299 / month	HVC / month	Read-out
2024 Q3 avg	26,931	23,649	3,053	Steady-state baseline
2025 Q1 avg	28,954	18,647	1,765	HVC drops 42% YoY
2025 Q2 avg	85,581	17,488	1,499	Free default-flip rolls out (3.0× spike on Free)
2025 Q4 avg	87,080	22,565	1,352	Free sustained, HVC still declining
2026 Q1 avg	67,374	19,106	1,031	Free decelerating; HVC at 91% decline
April 2026	75,276	16,959	898	HVC funnel essentially closed

What progress we have on the paid base is heavily weighted to lower-tier customers (Standard Monthly, Essentials Monthly). HVC migration has been collapsing for 24 months straight regardless of the Free default-flip. The mature paid base — especially HVC and Legacy plan customers in mature markets (US, UK, Australia, Netherlands, Switzerland) — has not moved. What progress we have is heavily weighted to Free tier acquisitions (default-flipped on signup) and emerging-market growth (India, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria — all 90%+ NUNI). The mature paid base has not moved.

2. Complication — Four things that change the calculus

C1. The HVC inversion is structural

NEA stickiness rises with MRR. The pattern reverses cleanly at the $299 HVC line: every MRR bucket above $299 has NEA at majority share, peaking at 58% in the $5k+ MRR bucket.

Editor share by paid MRR bucket (paid users only)

<$50

37/63

$50–100

48/52

$100–299

47/53

$299–500

53/47

$500–1k

50/50

$1k–2.5k

54/46

$2.5k–5k

57/43

$5k+

58/42

Orange = NEA, blue = NUNI. Inversion line at $299. NEA share is 36.6% at <$50 and rises to 58.0% at $5k+ — a clean monotonic trend among paid customers.

Editor share by MRR bucket (Free + Paid)

Free

36/64

Paid <$25

31/69

$25–50

43/57

$50–100

48/52

$100–299

47/53

$299–500

53/47

$500–1k

50/50

$1k–2.5k

54/46

$2.5k–5k

57/43

$5k+

58/42

Orange = NEA, blue = NUNI. Inversion line at $299.

Why this matters: HVC NEA stayers are a fundamentally different cohort. Median tenure 10 years (vs 7 for NUNI HVC). Median list size 37,273. They send 698K emails per quarter on average — 27% more than NUNI HVC. They use RSS-driven campaigns at 14× the rate of NUNI HVC, plaintext at 4×, and classic Automations at 2.4×. They are publishers, agencies, and code-savvy power users with entrenched workflows. They will not move on a default flip.

C2. Customer satisfaction got worse, not better

Two independent sources confirm migration did not improve the customer experience:

CES — Edit an Email survey (8,201 responses)

Editor	Mean CES	Top-2-box	Bottom-2-box
NEA (Old)	4.00	78.3%	6.8%
NUNI (New)	3.90	73.9%	10.4%

NUNI is 0.10 points worse on CES, top-box drops 4.4pp, bottom-box "hard to use" share inflates 52% relative.

Nuni Feedback Badge sentiment — paid customers (2,810 categorized)

Very Negative

1,008 (35.7%)

Negative

1,664 (59.0%)

Neutral / Mixed

189 (6.7%)

Positive / V.Pos

49 (1.7%)

94.7% negative among paid customers — 5.3pp worse than Free (89.4%). Migration hurt the highest-value users most.

Nuni Feedback Badge sentiment — Free + Paid (4,557 categorized)

Very Negative

1,567 (35.5%)

Negative

2,552 (57.8%)

Neutral / Mixed

345 (7.8%)

Positive / V.Pos

93 (2.1%)

93.3% negative for 8 consecutive quarters. No improvement trend.

Selection-bias caveat: Badge feedback is opt-in and skews to problems. The CES survey is randomly distributed and its 0.10-point drop is independent confirmation that migration did not improve effort.

C3. 225K customers tried NUNI and went back to NEA

The 24-month preference-event log shows 5 distinct migration outcomes:

Migration outcome	Users	Read-out
Net new (NUNI only)	2,868,026	Mostly default-flipped new signups
NEA only (true stayer)	833,981	Hold-outs who never even sampled NUNI
Sampled both same day	572,446	Confused / exploring
Reverter (tried NUNI → went back to NEA)	225,784	More reverters than completed migrators
Migrator (started on NEA → settled on NUNI)	218,723	Successful migrations from existing users

The reverter rate is 8–10% across the 24-month window. Applied to the $281M HVC ARR base, that implies $23M – $28M ARR at risk if forced migration is imposed without parity.

C4. Editor-cited churn is already real and accelerating

Of 308,704 customers who completed the Exit Survey over 24 months, 2,021 explicitly cited the email editor (Design tools) as the feature reason for cancelling. That is a structured floor — actual editor-attributable churn is 2–5× higher.

2,021

Editor-cited churners (structured signal, 24mo)

~6,000

Adjusted estimate w/ 3× hidden multiplier

$110K

Total monthly MRR-at-churn for cohort

$1.32M

ARR loss from cohort ($110K × 12)

Velocity doubled after the late-2024 default-flip

Pre-default-flip avg: 48 editor-cited churners/month (May–Oct 2024). Post-flip avg: ~94/month (Nov 2024 onwards). Early-warning signal that further forced migration without parity will accelerate the bleed.

How the $1.32M ARR floor was computed

2,021 churners cited "Design tools" in Exit Survey QID3 follow-up (May 2024 – May 2026)
1,629 had a paid order in the 60 days before churn → total MRR-at-churn = $110,408 (avg $67.78, median $20)
Annualized: $110,408 × 12 = $1.32M ARR loss
0.13% of the $85.0M total churned MRR over the same window — conservative explicit floor
Adjusted upper bound (3× multiplier): ~$3.96M ARR

3. The key question

How do we close the remaining $566M ARR of paid NEA base — with $281M ARR concentrated in 38K HVC accounts — without losing customers we cannot afford to lose, and without sustaining a 90%+ negative satisfaction profile that signals "this product is getting worse, not better"?

Sub-questions to answer in this brief

Which cohorts can we move safely right now, and which need product investment first?
What feature gaps are non-negotiable to close before we ask HVC customers to migrate?
What's the bounded carry cost of keeping NEA codebase available for the highest-risk cohort, vs. the ARR lost if we force them?
What's the early-warning metric we will watch to know if Phase 2 should pause or proceed?

4. Recommendation — A 3-phase, parity-gated migration playbook

The remaining 1.19M NEA users do not all carry the same risk. Sequenced by behavioral risk × revenue exposure × technical complexity, three phases minimize churn while making forward progress. Each phase has a parity prerequisite — moving the next cohort before the prior phase's gaps are closed bleeds money.

$60M ARR

Phase 1 mitigated (months 0–3, low risk)

$182M ARR

Cumulative after Phase 2 (months 3–9)

$281M ARR

Phase 3 protected via hybrid (months 9–18)

Phase 1 — Default-flip the low-risk cohort

Months 0–3Low risk~250K paid users + 800K Free~1.16M users$60M ARR mitigated

Cohort: Free Plan NEA users (800,756) + Paid <$299 NEA users not on Legacy Monthly (~254K of 346K) + non-Legacy Essentials Monthly NEA users without code/RSS power-user signal. Excludes anyone whose 90-day send history shows plaintext, RSS, parent automations, custom-HTML, or A/B variate parents.
Prerequisites (defect-tier — fixable in weeks): (1) Text editing reliability — cursor, paste behavior, line spacing. (2) Preview-test reliability — preview must equal sent rendering. (3) Mobile preview accuracy. None require structural NUNI changes; defect-fix tier.
Mechanism: Default-flip on next campaign create, with one-click "stay on classic" escape hatch for 30 days. After 30 days, NEA still available via deep link, not in main flow. 60-day full rollback option.
What we mitigate: ~250K paid users (the Paid <$299 non-Legacy non-power-user subset) + 800K Free users in the same flow. Paid MRR mitigated: ~$5M monthly = $60M ARR. Free contributes engagement signal but no MRR.~1.16M users (87% of remaining NEA), ~$5M monthly MRR, $60M ARR closed safely.
Why it's safe: Median tenure on the cohort that already migrated to NUNI Free is 12 months — short workflows, small content libraries, lowest concentration of power-user features. The CES delta in this segment is the smallest. They already auto-default to NUNI on new signups.

Phase 2 — Concierge nudge for medium-risk paid

Months 3–9Medium risk~150K paid users$122M ARR mitigated

Cohort: Paid <$299 NEA users with power-user signal (RSS, plaintext, automations, code-edit) + non-Legacy HVC NEA on Standard Monthly (9,615 users / $54M ARR) and Premium Monthly (5,385 users / $68M ARR). Approximately ~150K users / ~$122M ARR exposure.
Prerequisites (structural parity — must ship before Phase 2 begins): (1) Drag/drop precision parity (image side-by-side sizing, pixel positioning).
(2) Save / version-history reliability — no more "my work has been deleted" reports.
(3) Brand kit, font palette, color palette restored to NEA-equivalent breadth.
(4) Mobile editor parity.
(5) A/B variate workflow that supports HVC NEA's 28-children-per-parent pattern.
(6) Preview-test reliability hardening.
Mechanism: Account-by-account nudge in-product + email; CSM-led for HVC. 60-day fully-rollback-able trial. Auto-port templates and brand assets. For paid HVC, attach a named CSM contact for the first migrated campaign. Maintain dual-availability for at least 90 days post-flip.
Cumulative coverage after Phase 2: Phases 1+2 close ~98% of remaining NEA users and ~32% of paid NEA ARR ($182M of $566M). Critically, this leaves the highest-ARPU, highest-tenure cohort intact for Phase 3 — the right order, not the wrong order.

Phase 3 — Hybrid + concierge for HVC and Legacy plan

Months 9–18High risk~38K HVC + 92K Legacy$281M ARR addressed

Cohort (three sub-tracks): 3a: HVC NEA stayers on Standard / Premium plans (already nudged in P2 but did not convert).
3b: Legacy Monthly NEA users (91,746 users / $20.16M MRR = $242M ARR total, with 21,376 of them HVC at $150M ARR).
3c: Code/HTML-heavy HVC accounts and agencies regardless of plan.
Prerequisites (platform-tier investment): (a) Native HTML / code-edit mode in NUNI.
(b) RSS-driven campaign full feature parity (top NEA HVC behavioral signature — 14× usage).
(c) Native countdown / GIF / animation content blocks.
(d) Native arbitrary sections (un-blocks the $9,700-MRR P2 escalation pattern).
(e) AI Creative Assistant restored at parity or better.
(f) Migration tooling for journeys / automations created in NEA → NUNI with content preservation.
Mechanism: Track A (3a HVC Standard/Premium): Engineer-paired migration sprint per account. Replicate top 10 templates 1:1 and have customer review before flip. CSM acceptance gate. ~12-week per-account engagement.

Track B (3b Legacy plan): Hybrid offer — keep NEA available indefinitely or until customer affirmatively migrates. Pair with Legacy plan modernization conversation. Do not force.

Track C (3c code-heavy): NUNI HTML mode launch + agency-specific onboarding. Offer template-conversion service.
Risk acceptance: Even with the hybrid track, plan for $23–28M ARR at risk in this cohort if forcing is required (8–10% historical revert rate × $281M ARR base). The hybrid option mitigates almost all of this — at the cost of carrying NEA codebase 18+ more months. For 2.6% of users covering ~50% of paid MRR, that carry cost is bounded; the protected ARR is not.

Cumulative ARR mitigation by phase

After Phase 1

$60M / $566M (11%)

After Phase 2

$182M / $566M (32%)

After Phase 3 (hybrid)

$566M / $566M (100%)

Phase 1 closes 87% of users but only 11% of paid ARR. Phase 2 brings cumulative ARR coverage to ~32%. Phase 3 protects the remaining $383M ARR (Legacy + HVC) via hybrid co-availability.

Top 5 features to ship in Q1 to unlock Phase 1+2 cleanly

Save / version-history reliability fix — eliminates "my work has been deleted" defect class (357 negative responses on Defects topic).
Image side-by-side sizing, pixel positioning, resize-too-large warning — highest-volume Qualtrics topic (770 negative on Images). Tied to a $9,376 MRR Slack P0 escalation.
Brand kit and font/color palette restoration to NEA breadth — closes "saved templates lost" / "fonts gone" stayer theme.
Test-send and preview-rendering reliability — 370 negatives on Preview & Test.
AI Creative Assistant feature restoration — highest very-negative ratio (1.45×) of any topic.

Early-warning metric

Phase-1 reverter rate is the gate to Phase 2

Track the percentage of Phase 1 cohort that flips back to NEA after the default-flip. Above ~12% is a signal that the Phase 1 prerequisites haven't actually shipped. Use this as the gate to start Phase 2 — not calendar time alone. The 24-month historical revert rate is 8–10%; sustained above 12% means we're losing the cohort and Phase 2 should pause.

5. Decision asks

Ask	Owner	Why now
Approve the 3-phase migration playbook	VP Email	Without explicit phasing, default is "keep nudging" — which produced 91% YoY decline in HVC migration and a 2× rise in editor-cited churn velocity
Fund the Q1 Top-5 parity gaps	Eng leadership	Phase 2 cannot start without these shipped. Each delay quarter compounds the $281M HVC ARR exposure
Accept hybrid carry cost for 18 more months on NEA codebase	CTO + CFO	Carry cost is bounded; protects $281M ARR from reverter-rate churn. The alternative loses up to $28M ARR
Ratify the Phase-1 reverter-rate gate (12% threshold)	VP Email + CSM leadership	Prevents Phase 2 from starting on top of unfixed defects. Avoids repeating the late-2024 default-flip outcome (CES drop + 2× churn velocity)
Sponsor a Legacy Monthly plan modernization conversation in parallel with Phase 3b	Pricing + CSM	21,376 HVC accounts on Legacy plan = $150M ARR. Migrating off NEA is also the moment to migrate onto modern pricing

Answer-by date proposed: end of FY27 Q1, so Phase 1 prerequisites can ship in Q2 and the playbook can begin executing in early Q3.

Issues & Solutions Detail

Every parity gap and defect named in the recommendation, expanded in detail. For each: what is the issue, what job the customer is trying to do, how the issue blocks them (with verbatim VOC), what the solution looks like, what success looks like for the customer, and a From → To visual showing today's broken state vs the target state.

14 issues organized by recommendation phase. Severity = the cost of not shipping it before the corresponding migration phase begins.

Phase 1 prerequisites — defect tier (ship in Q1)

These are ship-blockers for the default-flip on Free + low-paid. Without them, we recreate the late-2024 bleed.

Save / version-history reliability

Critical Phase 1 357 negative VOCs

Customers report their email work has been deleted, reverted to old versions, or that template columns and sections are missing after save. There is no way to access previous saved versions of a campaign. When one user saves, another collaborator sees the unedited version. The Defects topic in our Qualtrics badge has 357 negative responses — the largest single defect class.

Customer JTBD

"I want to draft an email campaign over multiple sessions, with my team, and trust that my work is saved and recoverable if anything goes wrong."

How it blocks them

Users lose confidence to use NUNI for important campaigns. They abandon mid-edit, escalate to support, take screenshots as backup, or revert to NEA where they trust the save behavior.

"My work has been deleted, it's gone back to an old version of this email, my template columns and sections are missing, I can't edit it properly. This is really poor."

Solution

True version history with auto-save + restore points (every 30s + manual save points)
Persistent auto-save indicator visible at all times
"Restore previous version" UI in campaign menu
Conflict resolution / queue when multiple users edit
Defect-class fixes for the underlying state-management bugs

Success state

Customer iterates on a campaign over days/weeks with confidence. Can roll back to any prior version in one click. Browser crash = no lost work. Team collaboration works without overwrites.

Today (broken)

Save = hope
Lost work = panic + screenshots
Multi-user edits = silent overwrites
No version history

→

After (fixed)

Save = guaranteed, every 30s
Prior versions = 1-click restore
Multi-user = merge or queue
Browser crash = zero data loss

Preview-test reliability

Critical Phase 1 370 negative VOCs

Test sends fail to arrive for users who used to receive them reliably. The in-editor preview doesn't match the rendered email when sent. Mobile preview doesn't match Gmail mobile rendering. This is a confidence-killer for any pre-send QA workflow — and it's the second-largest defect class with 370 negative responses on the Preview & Test topic.

Customer JTBD

"Before I send to my list, I want to confidently verify the email looks correct on desktop, mobile, and across major email clients."

How it blocks them

Customers can't trust the preview, so they either skip the test send (risking a bad campaign hitting production), or do elaborate workarounds (sending to multiple personal addresses across providers, screenshotting). Some campaigns now go out without preview because the workflow is broken.

"The 'Send test' email function in the email campaign builder is NOT functioning for me. I have attempted to send test emails to multiple emails and none have come through. Previously this function was working fine."

Solution

Fix test-send delivery reliability (likely throttling / queue bug)
Render in-editor preview using the same engine that renders the sent email — eliminate the gap
Mobile preview powered by actual Gmail/iOS/Outlook rendering signals (not generic mobile CSS)
"Inbox preview" parity — multiple clients in one view

Success state

Test sends arrive within 30 seconds. Preview pixel-matches the sent email. Mobile preview looks identical to Gmail mobile rendering. Pre-send QA takes 2 minutes instead of 20.

Today (broken)

Test send: maybe arrives, maybe not
Preview ≠ what gets sent
Mobile preview ≠ Gmail mobile
Workaround: send to 4 personal accounts

→

After (fixed)

Test send guaranteed in <30s
Preview = sent (same render engine)
Mobile preview = real Gmail render
Inbox preview shows all major clients

Text editing reliability — cursor, paste, line spacing

Critical Phase 1 1,010 negative VOCs

Text editing is the highest-volume complaint topic (1,010 negative responses). Cursor jumps, pasted text loses formatting or pastes with wrong formatting, line spacing is inconsistent, fonts revert. The new builder doesn't match formatting when pasting simple Arial 12 plain text — even after clearing formatting.

Customer JTBD

"I want to write or paste my email copy and have it stay exactly how I formatted it — typing should feel like a normal text editor."

How it blocks them

Every paste from Word/Docs/Notes becomes a 5-minute formatting-fix exercise. Cursor jumps cause typos and erroneous deletes. Long-form newsletter writers find the editor unusable.

"I have used the legacy builder for years. The new builder doesn't match the formatting when I paste my very simple Arial 12 plain text. Even if I clear formatting, it pastes wrong."

Solution

Fix cursor positioning bugs (regression test against common selection patterns)
Implement a "paste as plain text" default + smart-paste options
Preserve line spacing across paste / save / reload
Stable font inheritance from brand kit

Success state

Customer pastes from Google Docs and the email looks like the doc. Types continuously without cursor jumps. Line spacing stays consistent. Doesn't think about the editor — thinks about the message.

Today (broken)

Cursor jumps mid-typing
Paste = formatting chaos
Line spacing inconsistent
Fonts revert to defaults silently

→

After (fixed)

Cursor stable through formatting
Paste preserves intent (or strips cleanly)
Line spacing locked once set
Fonts inherit from brand kit

Mobile preview accuracy

Critical Phase 1 354 negative VOCs

Mobile preview in NUNI doesn't match how the email renders on Gmail mobile, iOS Mail, or Outlook mobile. Customers without developer support can't optimize for mobile — images appear too large in mobile view of campaigns. 354 negative responses on the Mobile topic; layout breakage on Gmail desktop is the most-named symptom.

Customer JTBD

"I want to design once and have it look right on every device — without writing media queries or stacking by hand."

How it blocks them

B2C and ecomm customers (mobile-heavy audiences) produce campaigns that look fine in NUNI preview but break in real Gmail mobile. SMB owners without developers can't fix it.

"Would be really useful to have more mobile optimisation options for emails without the need for coding. Images appear too large in mobile view of our campaigns and we don't have a developer."

Solution

Mobile preview powered by actual Gmail/iOS/Outlook rendering signals
Mobile-specific CSS controls (image % sizing, column stacking behavior)
"Preview as Gmail mobile" button on every block
Auto-fit images for mobile (with override)

Success state

Customer composes on desktop, knows the mobile render will match. Subscribers on mobile see properly-sized images and stacked columns. No code required.

Today (broken)

Mobile preview ≠ Gmail mobile
Images render oversized on phones
Mobile-specific controls require code

→

After (fixed)

Mobile preview = real Gmail/iOS
Images auto-fit per device
Mobile controls native, no code

Phase 2 prerequisites — structural parity (ship months 3-9)

These unlock the concierge nudge for paid power-users + non-Legacy HVC. Without them, $122M ARR Phase 2 cohort cannot move safely.

Image controls & side-by-side sizing

High Phase 2 770 negative VOCs · $9,376 P0 escalation

NUNI lost the "this image is way too big" warning that NEA had. Cannot make side-by-side images the same size — what was a single click in NEA now requires manual pixel-level adjustments per image. Image rotation produces unexpected crops. Replicating a campaign from NEA to NUNI adds white gaps between images that don't show in preview but appear in the sent email — this is a $9,376 MRR P0 escalation.

Customer JTBD

"I want to lay out a multi-image email (product grid, gallery, side-by-side comparison) without doing math, and have it render the same way in inbox as it does in preview."

How it blocks them

Visual-heavy ecommerce + agency users can't produce the layouts they need without external image-editing tools. The replication white-gap defect actively damages campaigns that were perfect in NEA.

"How can I make side-by-side images be the same size? That was easy in the legacy builder, but I can't find that in the new editor."

Solution

Side-by-side equal-size auto-fit (default ON for image-row blocks)
Restore the "image too large" warning at upload time
Pixel-level positioning controls in image block panel
Fix the NEA→NUNI replication white-gap defect
Image rotation that preserves bounding box

Success state

Customer drops 3 product images into a row — they auto-balance. Receives a clear warning before uploading a 5MB image. Replicated campaigns from NEA render identically on send.

Today (broken)

Side-by-side = manual pixel math
Replication adds invisible white gaps
No size warning — 5MB images go through
Rotation crops unexpectedly

→

After (fixed)

Side-by-side auto-balance
Replication preserves layout 1:1
Size warning at upload
Rotation respects bounding box

Brand kit / font palette / color palette restoration

High Phase 2 131 v.neg Templates + 91 v.neg Fonts

NUNI restricts users to a smaller font palette than NEA had. Brand fonts uploaded to brand kit (e.g., Poppins, Merriweather Sans, DIN 2014) aren't recognized in the editor. Colors are limited to whatever was used in a specific email being used as a template — not the full palette. Saved templates from NEA aren't available in NUNI, leaving years of saved templates stranded.

Customer JTBD

"I want my brand to look consistent across every email — same fonts, same colors, same templates as the rest of my marketing."

How it blocks them

Brand directors can't enforce brand consistency. Customers using non-default fonts are stuck. Templates lost = weeks of redesign work to recreate. New brand director can't inherit the brand stack without rebuilding.

"The font we've been using (Merriweather Sans) for YEARS is no longer available on the Classic Builder. But switching to the New Builder, NONE of our saved templates are available anymore. We have SOOOOO many templates we've worked so hard on perfecting."

Solution

Restore full color palette + custom palette persistence
Brand-kit font upload that actually loads in the editor
NEA → NUNI template auto-port tool (run once per account, all saved templates)
Full font picker: web-safe + Google fonts + custom uploads
Brand-kit-as-source-of-truth: changing brand kit retro-applies to email defaults

Success state

Customer's brand kit is the single source of truth. Every NUNI email opens with their brand fonts/colors. All NEA templates ported and selectable. New team members inherit the brand stack on day one.

Today (broken)

Brand kit ignored by editor
Custom fonts not recognized
Colors limited to last template's palette
NEA templates stranded

→

After (fixed)

Brand kit = email defaults
Custom fonts + Google fonts available
Full color palette persistent
NEA templates auto-ported

Drag/drop precision & layout positioning

High Phase 2 224 neg Layouts + 314 neg Sections

Pixel-level positioning in NUNI is "wonky." Dragging a text box to another column requires NASA-level precision. Templates and other text fields jump around during drag. Buttons that were centered once suddenly all align left and can't be repositioned.

Customer JTBD

"I want to compose a layout exactly like I have in mind — drag elements where I want them, and have them stay there."

How it blocks them

Power users abandon NUNI mid-edit. Layouts take 3-5× longer than NEA. The precision deficit is one of the top stayer reasons in our HVC interviews.

"Regarding the new drag/drop template — very wonky. Dragging a text box to another column requires NASA-level precision as the template and other text fields jump around. Not nearly as simple as the legacy template."

Solution

Snap-to-grid + alignment guides during drag
Pixel-precise drag with clear drop targets
Lock element position once placed (don't auto-rearrange)
Undo for accidental moves

Success state

Drag = drop where you mean it. Layout takes the same time as NEA or less. Buttons stay where placed.

Today (broken)

Drag = NASA precision required
Other elements jump around
Buttons re-align without permission
Undo doesn't work for moves

→

After (fixed)

Snap-to-grid + alignment guides
Layout stays put once placed
Buttons hold their alignment
Undo / redo works for all moves

A/B variate workflow for power users

High Phase 2 HVC NEA pattern: 28 children/parent

HVC NEA users create 28 children per parent variate campaign on average. NUNI's A/B workflow doesn't support this volume cleanly. Reaching content of a sent multivariate-test campaign takes 5-6 clicks (replicate, save as template, delete, open template) vs 1 click for a simple campaign.

Customer JTBD

"I want to run multivariate tests with many variants (subject lines, content blocks, sender names, send times) at once and see results in one place."

How it blocks them

HVC marketers running serious experimentation can't replicate their NEA cadence in NUNI. They stay on NEA for variate even if they use NUNI for one-shot campaigns.

"Make it as easy to get to the content of previously-sent multivariate-test campaigns as it is to get to the content of previously sent straightforward campaigns. It is a one-click to access content of a [Sent] simple campaign, while for multivariate-test campaigns it is a 5 to 6 click process."

Solution

Native multivariate UI supporting 30+ children
One-click access to variate campaign content (parity with simple campaigns)
Variate results dashboard showing winner + lift across all dimensions
Easier subject line + preview text variant entry (bulk paste)

Success state

HVC marketer runs a 16-variant test (4 subject lines × 4 send times) in 5 minutes. Reviews results in one screen. Promotes winner to remainder of audience in one click.

Today (broken)

Variate UI breaks past ~5 children
5-6 clicks to view past variate content
Results scattered across screens
Bulk variant entry impossible

→

After (fixed)

Native 30+ children support
1-click variate content access
Results dashboard, winner clear
Bulk paste for subject/preview variants

AI Creative Assistant restoration

High Phase 2 Highest very-neg ratio (1.45×)

A premium AI Creative Assistant feature (banner generator, photo creative AI) was visibly removed or degraded in the NUNI transition. AI Features is the topic with the highest very-negative ratio (1.45×) in our entire VOC dataset — users are not just complaining, they're escalating. Direct churn-threat language tied to this loss.

Customer JTBD

"I'm a non-designer — I want AI to help me create on-brand visual assets (banners, photos, headers) without needing Photoshop or a freelancer."

How it blocks them

SMB and agency users used Creative Assistant to differentiate Mailchimp from competitors. With it gone, they're shopping other providers. Klaviyo and Brevo both invested in AI in 2025; this is competitive parity, not just a feature loss.

"Please bring back the AI creative photo feature? It was SO good and really set you apart from other email providers. And now it's gone. So sad about this and am thinking about moving providers."

Solution

Restore the Creative Assistant banner generator at parity
Add modern AI: text-to-image, brand-kit-aware generation, on-brand photo augmentation
Surface in NUNI editor as a primary content-block type (not buried)
Tier-gated: free for HVC, included in Standard+ plans

Success state

SMB customer creates a polished branded banner in 60 seconds, no design skills required. Agency generates per-client variants at scale. Mailchimp's AI story matches or exceeds Klaviyo/Brevo in 2026 reviews.

Today (broken)

Creative Assistant gone
No text-to-image
Customer churns to Klaviyo for AI
Differentiation lost vs competitors

→

After (fixed)

Creative Assistant restored + upgraded
Brand-kit-aware AI generation
Banner / photo / header in 60s
AI story leads industry

Mobile editor parity (edit on the go)

High Phase 2

NUNI editor is unusable on mobile devices. Switch desktop-mobile popup can't be closed on Safari Desktop. Solo founders and SMB owners who work from mobile can't do quick edits.

Customer JTBD

"I want to edit my email on the go (iPad, phone) — quick fixes, last-minute reviews, approvals."

How it blocks them

Solo founders and mobile-first marketers can't make quick edits. Approval workflows where someone needs to review on mobile break down.

"'Switch between desktop and mobile views' POPUP WINDOW CAN'T BE CLOSED ON SAFARI DESKTOP APP. ARE YOU EVER MAKING SURE THAT YOUR SERVICE WORKS ON ALL BROWSERS???"

Solution

Mobile-responsive editor (works on iPad and phone)
Fix the desktop-mobile popup blocker on Safari
Mobile-specific edit UI for common quick actions (text, image swap, send)
Native iOS/Android approval flow for review-only roles

Success state

Founder edits an email on iPad while traveling. Reviewer approves on phone in 60 seconds. Editor works on every browser including Safari.

Today (broken)

NUNI unusable on mobile
Safari popup-blocker bug
No quick-edit mobile UI

→

After (fixed)

Editor works on iPad + phone
Safari popup fixed
Mobile approval flow

Phase 3 prerequisites — platform-tier investment (ship months 9-18)

These unlock the hybrid + concierge migration for HVC + Legacy plan. Without them, $281M ARR HVC cohort cannot move at all.

Native HTML / code-edit mode in NUNI

Platform Phase 3 75 neg HTML + 65 v.neg HTML

NUNI has no proper HTML / code-edit mode. Ctrl+K to insert links doesn't work in Firefox or Chrome. Users who need to paste HTML or edit code have to use Classic. Style rules are too rigid for unusual layouts.

Customer JTBD

"I want to paste in custom HTML/CSS for a unique layout, embed dynamic content from another tool, or troubleshoot rendering issues at the code level."

How it blocks them

Code-savvy SMBs, agencies, and developers stay on NEA. Cannot use NUNI for any campaign that requires non-trivial HTML. This is the #1 blocker for the agency segment.

"I absolutely HATE that in the new builder Ctrl+K to insert links doesn't work on Firefox or Chrome. It's maddening! And I hate how the styling rules are so rigid now — I understand it's probably trying to streamline the process, but when I have something small I need to tweak to some unusual look..."

Solution

Native HTML view (toggle between WYSIWYG and code)
CSS injection support per email or per template
Ctrl+K and other keyboard shortcuts working in Firefox/Chrome
"Less restrictive styling" mode with override option
Custom merge tag support beyond standard

Success state

Developer pixel-tweaks email in code mode. Agency uses NUNI for all clients regardless of complexity. Custom merge tags work. Keyboard shortcuts work everywhere.

Today (broken)

No native HTML view
Ctrl+K broken in Firefox/Chrome
Styling too rigid for tweaks
Code-savvy users locked into NEA

→

After (fixed)

WYSIWYG ↔ Code toggle
Keyboard shortcuts work everywhere
CSS injection supported
Agencies can move to NUNI

RSS-driven campaign full feature parity

Platform Phase 3 14× HVC NEA usage vs NUNI

NEA HVC users use RSS-driven campaigns at 14× the rate of NUNI HVC users (130K events vs 9.2K events in 90 days). The RSS workflow in NUNI is incomplete or buggy for advanced use cases. Publishers, podcasters, and content sites have no migration path.

Customer JTBD

"I publish blog content / podcast episodes / news, and want to automatically generate a recurring email digest from my RSS feed without manual work each time."

How it blocks them

An entire ICP (publishers, content sites, podcasters) cannot move to NUNI without losing their core workflow. They will not migrate without this.

Solution

Native RSS-driven campaign in NUNI with full feature parity to NEA
RSS preview — see what the next campaign will contain before it sends
Multi-feed merge support
Custom RSS-to-content-block mapping
Auto-thumbnail extraction from feed items

Success state

Publisher sets up an RSS-driven daily digest in NUNI in 10 minutes. Same delivery, rendering, and reliability as NEA. Multiple feeds in one digest.

Today (broken)

RSS workflow incomplete in NUNI
Publishers stuck on NEA
14× usage gap shows it

→

After (fixed)

Native RSS in NUNI at parity
Multi-feed support
Publishers migrate cleanly

Native content blocks: countdown / GIF / animation

Platform Phase 3 $7,150 MRR P0 escalation · 600K-recipient threat

GIFs don't work properly in NUNI (won't fill the space, render inconsistently). No native countdown clock content block — a $7,150 MRR P0 escalation is tied to this. Customers threatening to move 600,000 recipients elsewhere over GIF support.

Customer JTBD

"I want to add visual urgency (countdown to a sale, animated promo) and dynamic visual elements (GIFs, animation) without needing third-party tools or code."

How it blocks them

Ecommerce promo emails (BFCM, sales) need countdown timers. Animated GIFs are a core marketing visual format. Without them, customers go to Klaviyo, Stripo, or BEE.

"FIX HOW GIFS WORK IN THE NEW BUILDER!!! I despise that we have to use the Classic builder to get GIFs to work, fill the whole space. I'm about ready to take our 600k recipients elsewhere if you guys don't improve this."

Solution

Native countdown clock content block (timezone-aware, customizable styling)
GIF block that handles fill, sizing, fallback for Outlook
Lottie / animated SVG support for non-GIF animation
Animation library with on-brand templates

Success state

Marketer drops a countdown timer into a BFCM email in 30 seconds. GIF fills the space and renders correctly across all major clients including Outlook.

Today (broken)

GIFs don't fill space
No countdown block
Customers leave for Klaviyo/Stripo

→

After (fixed)

Native countdown clock
GIFs fill correctly + Outlook fallback
Animation library on-brand

Arbitrary sections (beyond Header / Body / Footer)

Platform Phase 3 $9,700 MRR P2 escalation

NUNI restricts emails to three section types: Header, Body, Footer. Customers want to create arbitrary sections with their own backgrounds, padding, and content (e.g., a "Promo Banner" section with a background image and text overlay). This is the $9,700 MRR P2 escalation pattern. The "sections-only" model is the most-named layout restriction.

Customer JTBD

"I want to create distinct visual sections in my email (hero, promo, testimonials, footer) each with their own background image, styling, and layout."

How it blocks them

Sophisticated newsletter design is impossible in NUNI. Designers can't create multi-section layouts that are standard in modern email design.

"Customer would like the ability in NUNI to add new sections. Right now they are limited to Header, Body, Footer. They want to add a background image to a particular section and have text overlayed on top (as well as a CTA)."

Solution

Allow arbitrary section creation (not limited to 3 types)
Per-section background image, padding, alignment
Section templates (hero, promo, testimonial, divider, etc.)
Section-level styling that doesn't bleed into siblings

Success state

Designer creates a 6-section newsletter (hero / promo / 2-column content / testimonials / CTA / footer) each with distinct branding. Matches the design vision pixel-for-pixel.

Today (broken)

Only 3 section types allowed
No per-section background images
Multi-section newsletters impossible

→

After (fixed)

Arbitrary section creation
Per-section bg + padding + alignment
Section template library

Cross-cutting — applies across all phases

Migration tooling and rollback UX. These touch every customer migrating, regardless of phase.

NEA → NUNI template / journey migration tooling

Cross-cutting All phases

Content created in NEA (campaigns, journeys, automations) cannot be auto-migrated to NUNI. Customers have to manually rebuild every campaign, every journey email, every saved template. This is the single biggest practical reason long-tenured customers won't move.

Customer JTBD

"I have years of saved templates, journeys, and active automations in NEA. I want to switch to NUNI without losing any of that work."

How it blocks them

The cost of recreating their entire content library is paid by the customer, not by us. For a HVC with 200 templates and 15 journeys, that's weeks of work. They calculate the cost and decline to migrate.

"I wish there was an option to switch between builders in already existing content. We have a lot of content, such as journeys, that are made with the old/classic builder, and we would like to update it to a new design that has been made with the new builder. Right now that's not possible."

Solution

Bulk template migration tool (NEA template → NUNI template, preserve fidelity)
Journey/automation content migration that preserves email content per step
Side-by-side compare: see NEA template + NUNI rendered version before committing
Rollback if a migration loses fidelity
Run-by-account pre-migration audit report ("here's what will change")

Success state

Long-tenured customer migrates 200 templates and 15 journeys in one click. Reviews each, accepts or fixes. Done in an hour, not weeks. Trust restored.

Today (broken)

No bulk migration tool
Journeys must be rebuilt by hand
Cost = weeks of customer work
HVCs decline to migrate

→

After (fixed)

1-click bulk template migration
Journey content auto-ported per step
Side-by-side compare + rollback
Hours not weeks

Forced-migration / "no way back" UX

Critical All phases 369 New-vs-Legacy VOCs

When customers were default-flipped to NUNI, the option to go back to NEA was hidden or removed from the main flow. Customers feel trapped. Direct churn-threat language: 369 explicit New-vs-Legacy complaints in our Qualtrics badge with the highest concentration of "I'm shopping providers" mentions.

Customer JTBD

"I want to try the new editor at my own pace, with the safety of being able to go back if it doesn't work for me."

How it blocks them

Loss of control = loss of trust. Even customers who would have eventually migrated are now angry about how it happened. The 28.6% reverter rate among customers who tried both is a direct consequence of this lack of safety net.

"I want the older version of Mailchimp, legacy builder, back! I went on Google to get directions on how to change the default settings and it is not an option to change it anymore."

Solution

Always-available "switch back to classic" option for 60 days post-flip
Per-campaign editor choice (don't force a global flip)
Clear in-product communication about default changes (not silent)
Hybrid mode for accounts that have explicitly opted to stay on NEA
Reverter dashboard for support team to monitor health

Success state

Customer feels in control of their migration timing. Default-flip becomes a soft nudge, not a forced switch. Reverter rate drops to 5% or less. Trust in product changes restored.

Today (broken)

"Switch back" option hidden
Global flip, no per-campaign choice
Silent default changes
Customers Google for workarounds

→

After (fixed)

"Switch back" always available 60d
Per-campaign editor choice
Clear comms before changes
Hybrid mode for opt-in stayers

Reading this section as a roadmap input

The 16 issues above are organized by the migration phase that depends on them. Each Phase 1 issue is a Q1 ship-blocker; Phase 2 issues are Q2 commitments; Phase 3 issues are H2 platform investments. The cross-cutting items (15 + 16) should be in flight from day one because they affect every customer touched by any phase. Total estimated eng investment: a focused 3-quarter program for ~6-8 engineers across editor + brand kit + migration tooling teams.

Appendix

Detailed breakdowns, data, and verbatim VOC supporting the narrative above. Tables update with the Paid-only / Free+Paid tab toggle where applicable.

A. Methodology & data sources

Tables queried

bi_marketing.lcm_marketing_account_base (pipeline date 2026-05-11) — last_email_editor_used, plan, MRR, country, ecomm level, partner flag, tenure
bi_activities.users_activities — NEA campaign_editor_preference update + NUNI campaign_editor_preference update events (24mo)
bi_activities.email_campaign_send_activities + bi_product.sent_email_activities — campaign feature adoption, send volume
bi_aggregate.mbr_monthly — gross churn users + amount by package, 24mo
mailchimp.users_packages — historical plan / package at time of churn
mailchimp.orders — last paid amount in 60-day window pre-churn
qualtrics.survey_responses — Exit Survey (308,704 responses), CES Edit-an-Email (8,201), Nuni Feedback Badge (4,557 categorized)
Slack: #hvc_feedback, #mc-hvc-escalations, #mc-reporting-analytics-feedback — 1,551 editor-related VOCs after dedup

Key definitions

NEA = legacy/classic email editor
NUNI = new email editor
HVC = high-value customer ($299+ MRR)
ARR = monthly MRR × 12
Paid customer = MRR > 0 in current snapshot (936,992 paid users; 917,145 with editor signal)
Free customer = MRR is null or 0 in current snapshot
Editor-cited churn = customers who completed Exit Survey within 24mo and selected "Design tools" in QID3 under primary reason "Features not advanced enough or missing features"

B. Data quality cross-checks

Verifications run before publication to ensure all numbers reconcile across queries.

Check	Value	Result
Total external accounts (most recent pipeline)	4,431,032	Matches table row count
Internal users excluded	0	OK
External accounts with editor signal	3,158,305	71.3% — matches share calc denominator
External accounts without editor signal	1,272,727	Excluded from share (never created an email)
Total paid (MRR > 0) external	936,992	OK
Paid with editor signal	917,145	97.9% of paid base — primary paid-only denominator
Paid without editor signal	19,847	2.1% of paid — newly paid, not yet sent — excluded from share
Total paid MRR (all paid)	$97,350,939	Sanity reconciles to $1.17B ARR
Paid MRR with editor signal	$96,693,562	$1.16B ARR — primary headline
Paid NEA MRR sum	$47,162,000	$566M ARR ✓
Paid NUNI MRR sum	$49,532,000	$595M ARR ✓
HVC NEA MRR (sum across $299+ buckets)	$23,386,790	$281M ARR ✓
HVC NUNI MRR (sum across $299+ buckets)	$20,947,702	$251M ARR ✓
Distinct user_ids in source = row count	4,431,032 = 4,431,032	No duplicates
Editor-cited churners (distinct user_ids)	2,009 distinct of 2,021 responses	12 users took the survey twice; deduped on user_id for cohort analyses
Editor-cited cohort with billing record (60d pre-churn)	1,629 (81%)	Used for $110K MRR-at-churn calculation; remainder were free or pre-record

Known caveats

Editor-cited churn is the conservative explicit floor from QID3 = "Design tools." Actual editor-attributable churn likely 2–5× higher (signal hidden in "Other"/"Difficult to use"/"Performance" primary-reason paths).
CES survey doesn't tag responses with plan tier — split is on editor-version only, not paid vs free. Paid sentiment from Nuni Badge survey (where Plan tag exists) is the cleanest paid-only satisfaction signal.
~1.27M accounts have no editor signal (never created an email) and are excluded from share calculations.
ARR estimates assume no winback / future expansion.
May 2026 partial month (only 11 days) shown for completeness; not used in trend averages.

C. Geo / plan / ICP — paid customers only

Top countries (paid customers with editor signal)

Country	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share	NEA MRR	NUNI MRR
USA	178,718	261,425	40.6%	$22.27M	$25.12M
United Kingdom	38,282	56,640	40.3%	$4.75M	$5.47M
Canada	23,362	31,211	42.8%	$2.45M	$2.51M
Australia	20,664	29,062	41.6%	$2.40M	$2.58M
Netherlands	13,652	14,124	49.2%	$1.48M	$1.19M
Spain	10,071	10,628	48.7%	$1.27M	$0.97M
Italy	9,792	10,457	48.4%	$1.15M	$0.92M
Germany	7,495	8,216	47.7%	$0.84M	$0.75M
France	7,365	7,322	50.1%	$0.98M	$0.73M
Belgium	6,876	7,571	47.6%	$0.83M	$0.73M
Switzerland	6,777	6,509	51.0%	$0.75M	$0.53M
Sweden	3,810	4,758	44.5%	$0.49M	$0.49M
Austria	2,476	2,240	52.5%	$0.26M	$0.17M
India	1,582	4,216	27.3%	$0.19M	$0.27M
Mexico	2,418	4,389	35.5%	$0.38M	$0.47M
Brazil	2,404	5,243	31.4%	$0.26M	$0.40M

Among paid customers, France, Switzerland, and Austria are NEA-majority by users. Netherlands, Spain, France, and Switzerland have NEA leading on MRR even when NUNI leads on user count — meaning their NEA accounts are higher-MRR.

By marketing plan (paid only)

Plan	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share	NEA MRR	NEA ARR
Essentials Monthly	183,149	207,633	46.9%	$9.13M	$110M
Standard Monthly	103,450	275,226	27.3%	$12.08M	$145M
Legacy Monthly	91,746	40,943	69.1%	$20.16M	$242M
Premium Monthly	5,552	8,101	40.7%	$5.73M	$69M

Legacy Monthly is the single biggest NEA pocket — 69.1% NEA share and $242M ARR all on the legacy editor. 21,376 of these are HVC ($150M ARR slice).

By ICP (paid only)

ICP	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share	NEA MRR
Ecommerce-integrated	112,786	165,811	40.5%	$14.72M
Ecommerce upgrade (ECU)	25,407	41,257	38.1%	$5.04M
Non-ecommerce	246,068	325,816	43.0%	$27.39M

Non-ecommerce paid customers are slightly more NEA-loyal (43%) than ecommerce (40.5%) — pure-email-marketers have stickier workflows. $329M of the $566M paid NEA ARR sits in non-ecommerce accounts.

D. Geo / plan / ICP — Free + Paid

By global region (country group, Free + Paid)

Region	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share
North America	540,354	764,298	41.4%
EMEA	485,723	721,021	40.3%
APAC	112,276	334,472	25.1%
LATAM	45,973	153,207	23.1%

By marketing plan (Free + Paid)

Plan	NEA users	NUNI users	NEA share
Free Plan	796,571	1,421,152	35.9%
Essentials Monthly	184,076	209,987	46.7%
Standard Monthly	104,572	290,933	26.4%
Legacy Monthly	92,175	41,173	69.1%
Premium Monthly	5,793	8,407	40.8%

E. 24-month migration trend (paid customers only)

Month	Paid <$299	HVC	Paid total
2024-05	40,468	10,930	51,398
2024-06	25,970	4,638	30,608
2024-07	22,663	3,514	26,177
2024-08	22,273	2,951	25,224
2024-09	21,612	2,692	24,304
2024-10	21,834	2,706	24,540
2024-11	20,904	2,297	23,201
2024-12	18,831	1,673	20,504
2025-01	19,815	1,871	21,686
2025-02	17,805	1,704	19,509
2025-03	18,322	1,721	20,043
2025-04	18,079	1,602	19,681
2025-05	20,528	1,737	22,265
2025-06	17,855	1,459	19,314
2025-07	16,475	1,302	17,777
2025-08	16,093	1,108	17,201
2025-09	19,562	1,357	20,919
2025-10	20,904	1,332	22,236
2025-11	24,773	1,441	26,214
2025-12	22,017	1,283	23,300
2026-01	20,115	1,096	21,211
2026-02	17,509	981	18,490
2026-03	19,694	1,016	20,710
2026-04	16,959	898	17,857

Paid HVC migration declined from 10,930 (May 2024) to 898 (April 2026) — 91.8% decline. Paid <$299 fell from 40,468 to 16,959 — 58% decline. No part of the paid base saw a default-flip-driven uplift.

F. Migrator vs stayer profile (paid only, by MRR bucket)

Bucket	Editor	Users	MRR	ARR	Median tenure	Median list size
<$50	NEA	182,247	$4.85M	$58M	75 mo	692
<$50	NUNI	315,323	$7.83M	$94M	26 mo	457
$50–100	NEA	72,336	$5.05M	$61M	101 mo	2,896
$50–100	NUNI	79,668	$5.41M	$65M	43 mo	2,509
$100–299	NEA	91,533	$13.86M	$166M	108 mo	8,062
$100–299	NUNI	102,929	$15.36M	$184M	51 mo	7,021
HVC $299–1k	NEA	33,475	$15.06M	$181M	118 mo	33,343
HVC $299–1k	NUNI	31,075	$14.23M	$171M	83 mo	31,152
HVC $1k+	NEA	4,670	$8.32M	$100M	119 mo	177,059
HVC $1k+	NUNI	3,889	$6.72M	$81M	92 mo	162,372

Across every paid bucket, NEA stayers are 2-3× longer-tenured with similar or larger lists. The HVC $1k+ NEA cohort (4,670 users, $100M ARR) is the most concentrated risk concentration in the entire base.

G. Stayer reasons — 8 themed buckets with verbatim VOC

Synthesized from 4,557 categorized Qualtrics badge responses, 8,201 CES responses, and 1,551 editor-related Slack VOCs over 24 months.

T1 — Conditional stayer (gated on a specific named feature)

"I would switch to the new version if you added the option to have side-by-side buttons like the classic version has. Also, I don't need AI every time I'm writing something and the pop-up blocks the editing screen."Qualtrics badge

"Can the new campaign builder tool get social share functionality, the ability to highlight text, and the ability to insert images in a text block. These are available in the older builder and are limiting my ability to switch."Slack #hvc_feedback · $1,208 MRR

T2 — Custom HTML / code editing is unsupported in NUNI

"I have used the legacy builder for years. I tried the new builder. The new builder doesn't match the formatting when I paste my very simple Arial 12 plain text. Even if I clear formatting, it pastes wrong."Qualtrics badge

"I absolutely HATE that in the new builder Ctrl+K to insert links doesn't work on Firefox or Chrome. It's maddening! And I hate how the styling rules are so rigid now."Qualtrics badge

T3 — Templates / brand stack don't port over

"The font we've been using (Merriweather Sans) for YEARS is no longer available on the Classic Builder. But switching to the New Builder, NONE of our saved templates are available anymore."Qualtrics badge

"It would be nice if there was a way to easily switch the email builder from Classic to New, even in an automation flow. Specifically, if an email was created in a Classic/Legacy builder you should have the option to turn it into NUNI WITHOUT having to do it manually each time."Slack #hvc_feedback

T4 — Layout / template flexibility regressed (Slack: 31 VOCs / $26.4K MRR)

"Customer would like the ability in NUNI to add new sections. Right now they are limited to Header, Body, Footer. They want to add a background image to a particular section and have text overlayed on top (as well as a CTA)."Slack #mc-hvc-escalations · P2 · $9,700 MRR

"Bring back the pre-built content blocks with images and buttons! The sections builder is too restrictive to build a non-sales oriented email. It's pretty awful, actually."Qualtrics badge

T5 — Drag/drop precision & image manipulation regression (Slack: 18 VOCs / $35.4K MRR)

"When replicating a campaign from NEA to NUNI, there are white gaps added in between images when you send a test email. These white gaps do NOT show up in the email builder nor the preview itself."Slack #mc-hvc-escalations · P0 · $9,376 MRR

"Regarding the new drag/drop template — very wonky. Dragging a text box to another column requires NASA-level precision as the template and other text fields jump around."Qualtrics badge

T6 — RSS / GIF / advanced content blocks broken or missing

"FIX HOW GIFS WORK IN THE NEW BUILDER!!! I despise that we have to use the Classic builder to get GIFs to work. I'm about ready to take our 600k recipients elsewhere if you guys don't improve this."Slack #hvc_feedback · GIF/600k threat

"Cannot add anchors. Switching back to legacy builder where anchors are working fine."Qualtrics badge

T7 — AI Creative Assistant downgrade / removal

"Please bring back the AI creative photo feature? It was SO good and really set you apart from other email providers. And now it's gone. So sad about this and am thinking about moving providers."Qualtrics badge · churn risk

"Please, please, please bring back the Creative Assistant! I loved the ability to make banners within the tool. This was such an amazing asset and very, very missed!"Slack #hvc_feedback

T8 — Forced-migration anxiety + no-way-back rage

"This upgrade sucks! Bring back the older version. I'm looking for a new app. Again — this is one of the hardest apps I've ever used."Qualtrics badge · churn risk

"I want the older version of Mailchimp, legacy builder, back! I went on Google to get directions on how to change the default settings and it is not an option to change it anymore."Qualtrics badge

"The old version was much more intuitive. I waste so much time now, I'm thinking of shopping other services."Qualtrics badge · churn risk

H. Editor-cited churn deep dive (counts + revenue + annualized)

Cohort identification

Source: Exit Survey (SV_5bCYdxZWI4RYDnU), 308,704 responses over 24 months
Filter: Primary reason = "Features not advanced enough" + QID3 follow-up = "Design tools"
Result: 2,021 churners (2,009 distinct user_ids; 12 users responded twice)
Confirmation: 2,019 of 2,021 are confirmed exits — they no longer appear in lcm_marketing_account_base

As share of all churn

Lens	Editor-cited	Denominator	Share
% of all Exit Survey respondents	2,021	308,704	0.65%
% of all gross churners (paid → non-paid, 24mo)	2,021	980,698	0.21%
% of total churned MRR	$110,408	$84.96M	0.13%

Revenue impact — annualized

Metric	Conservative floor	Adjusted upper bound (3× hidden multiplier)
Editor-cited churners (24mo)	2,021	~6,000
Total MRR-at-churn captured	$110,408	~$330,000
ARR loss	$1.32M	~$3.96M
Average MRR per churner	$67.78	~$55
Median MRR	$20	~$20

Package distribution at time of churn (1,714 of 2,009 with paid package record)

Package	Users	Avg ARPU	Annualized ARR
Standard Monthly	1,227	$85	$1.25M
Essentials Monthly	361	$58	$252K
Legacy Paid Monthly	93	$105	$120K
Premium Monthly	15	$766	$132K
Core Commerce	15	~$80	$12K
Free / unmatched	298	—	$0
Total (cohort)	2,009	$67.78 avg	$1.32M ARR

Velocity — pre vs post default-flip

Period	Editor-cited churners / month	Read-out
Pre-default-flip (May–Oct 2024)	48 / mo	Baseline rate
Post-default-flip (Nov 2024 onward)	94 / mo	2.0× velocity increase

I. HVC NEA stayer characteristics — the $281M ARR cohort

38,145

HVC users on NEA

$281M

Annualized ARR ($23.4M MRR × 12)

56%

On Legacy Monthly plan

118 mo

Median tenure (~10 yrs)

Where the $281M ARR sits

Slice	Users	Monthly MRR	Annualized ARR
USA	18,141	$11.5M	$138M
United Kingdom	3,918	$2.4M	$28M
Australia	1,871	$1.07M	$13M
Canada	1,771	$1.05M	$13M
Netherlands	1,126	$602K	$7.2M
Spain	1,026	$598K	$7.2M
Italy	920	$494K	$5.9M
France	855	$514K	$6.2M
Legacy Monthly plan (cross-cut)	21,376	$12.5M	$150M
Standard Monthly plan	9,615	$4.5M	$54M
Premium Monthly plan	5,385	$5.7M	$68M
Non-ecommerce ICP	21,272	$12.7M	$152M
Ecommerce ICP	12,046	$7.7M	$92M

J. Migration outcome breakdown — 24-month preference events

Outcome	Users	% of total events
Net new (NUNI only in window)	2,868,026	61%
NEA only in window (true stayer)	833,981	18%
Sampled both same day	572,446	12%
Reverter (last action: NEA)	225,784	5%
Migrator (last action: NUNI)	218,723	5%

Reverters slightly exceed completed migrators. The 8–10% revert rate applied to the $281M HVC ARR base implies $23–28M ARR at risk under forced migration without parity.

K. Cumulative phase-mitigation calculator

Phase	Window	Users in cohort	Monthly MRR mitigated	Annualized ARR mitigated	Cumulative ARR coverage
Phase 1	Months 0–3	~250K paid + 800K Free	$5.0M	$60M	11%
Phase 2	Months 3–9	~150K paid	$10.2M	$122M	32%
Phase 3 (hybrid)	Months 9–18	~38K HVC + 92K Legacy	$23.4M (preserved, not converted)	$281M	100%
Total addressable			$47.16M	$566M	100%

L. Slack VOC summary statistics

Channel	Total scanned	Editor-related VOCs
`#hvc_feedback`	5,423	1,381
`#mc-hvc-escalations`	136	8
`#mc-reporting-analytics-feedback`	2,317	162
Total	7,876	1,551

VOC bucket split

Bucket	VOCs
Migrator NUNI complaints (people on NUNI complaining)	545
Stayer NEA reasons (explicit reasons to stay)	15
NUNI positive sentiment	7
CSAT / explicit churn signal quotes	15