Case studies · free

Three accounts, taken apart.

Each one the same way: what was done, what was right, what went wrong, what should have happened, and what the correct plan does to the money. Sources named at the bottom of each.

eBay 2013–2015
Controlled experiment

They switched paid search off and sales barely moved

What was done

eBay ran a large controlled experiment on their own paid search, published by Blake, Nosko and Tadelis in Econometrica in 2015. Branded keyword ads were switched off in test markets while matched markets kept running.

What was done well

The design itself. They used real markets, matched controls and their own revenue rather than a platform dashboard. Almost nobody does this, which is why the paper is still the reference twelve years later.

What went wrong

Before the experiment, the account was judged on attributed return. The naive measurement said the spend returned 4,173%. It had been buying clicks from people who were arriving anyway.

What should have happened

Run the switch-off on branded terms first, in a subset of regions, for a defined period. Branded is where intent is highest and therefore where attribution flatters most.

What the right plan does to the economics

On the same spend, attribution said plus 4,173% and the experiment said minus 63%. For an account spending $40,000 a month on brand terms, a result like that turns roughly $480,000 of annual spend from a reported profit centre into a cost with no measured return. The money does not disappear: it moves back into channels that create demand rather than harvest it.

Blake, Nosko and Tadelis, «Consumer Heterogeneity and Paid Search Effectiveness», Econometrica 83(1), 2015
Any account ongoing
Structural

Performance Max quietly eats the brand budget

What was done

A single Performance Max campaign is given a large share of budget and left to allocate across Search, Shopping, YouTube, Display, Discover and Gmail.

What was done well

The reporting is honest about totals. Spend, conversions and value are all correct at campaign level, so nothing in the account looks broken.

What went wrong

Brand searches are the cheapest conversions available, so the system buys them first. Reported cost per acquisition falls, everybody is pleased, and prospecting quietly stops.

What should have happened

Exclude your own brand terms from Performance Max with a brand exclusion list before judging it, and keep a separate brand campaign so the two are visible apart from each other.

What the right plan does to the economics

Our own arithmetic on a modelled account: 20,000 dollars a month, blended cost per acquisition of 45 dollars, and 60% of conversions coming from brand. Separate the two and prospecting shows a real cost per acquisition near 95 dollars, brand near 12. The blended 45 described neither. Decisions made on 45 either overpay for brand or starve the only part that adds customers.

Google Ads Help, «About Performance Max campaigns» and «Brand exclusions» · our own modelled account, offered as arithmetic rather than a case
Any account ongoing
Waste

Broad match with no search terms review

What was done

Keywords are set to broad match to let the system find demand, and the search terms report is opened once at setup and never again.

What was done well

Broad match does find phrasings a human would not list, and on a well fed account with clean conversion data it can outperform tight exact match lists.

What went wrong

Without weekly review it buys jobs, free, DIY, competitor research and other countries. The keyword list stays short and tidy while the actual purchases drift far from it.

What should have happened

Read the search terms report weekly, sorted by cost. Build one shared negative list of intent words rather than adding negatives campaign by campaign.

What the right plan does to the economics

Take a 20,000 dollar monthly budget at 4 dollars a click: 5,000 clicks. If a quarter of them were never going to buy, that is 5,000 dollars a month and 60,000 dollars a year. At a 3% conversion rate, removing that waste moves cost per lead from 178 to 133 dollars without touching bids, budget or creative.

Google Ads Help, «Search terms report» · our own arithmetic, shown in full on the free calculator

Figures attributed to a named company come from the published source under that case. Figures we calculated ourselves are labelled as our own arithmetic on a modelled account. This is teaching material, not advice for your account.

Free consultation

Recognise your account in one of these?

Tell us which one and roughly what you spend. We reply with what to check first. No call, no pitch.

Open the free calculator