Using a Modest Campaign Result to Make a Better Media Decision

The Challenge

Conquip's end-of-financial-year promotion included a long list of products with different stock positions, prices and buyer groups. Extending the same offer unchanged risked promoting items with only one unit left, mixing lifting equipment with machinery attachments and generating low-intent social leads that sales would still need to chase.

What I Did

I reviewed the product sheet with the sales team, removed or repriced unsuitable items and split the promotion into clearer lifting and mechanical-attachment campaigns. I designed separate Meta ad sets, prioritised contextual on-site images and planned a lookalike audience from people who had engaged with the first promotion. I then read the campaign on both lead count and deal value.

How I Did It

• 01: Aligned creative and product selection with live inventory before media spend.
• 02: Separated product families so targeting and sales follow-up could be more specific.
• 03: Used an initial audience to create future retargeting and lookalike options.
• 04: Compared spend, leads, deals and value instead of celebrating form fills alone.

The Result

The follow-on stocktake campaign generated 12 leads and three deals from about $600 in ad spend, but only around $1,700 in recorded deal value. That was not a result to disguise. It showed that the channel could generate response while the promoted product mix produced insufficient commercial value. The next decision was therefore tighter product selection and audience targeting, not indiscriminate budget growth.

Why It Matters

I treat underwhelming campaign economics as useful evidence. The goal is not to defend the campaign; it is to improve the next allocation decision.