This client has been an established luxury bathroom seller for over 20 years and one of the best in the industry in the United Kingdom. Their e-Commerce business was struggling with a negative ROI for a few of the brands they carried and they wanted to quickly increase their paid traffic efforts.
As with every PPC campaign we run, our ultimate goal is to maximise the advertising budget and waste absolutely zero resources. And this is not always as easy as it sounds. Making sure you are getting the most out of your advertising dollar requires advanced techniques and expertise. With over 50 brands in total, we focused on the ones with low and negative ROAS and applied a shopping structure that targets all three stages of a buying funnel. Again, every business will have different ROI thresholds, but in our case everything below 300% meant we were losing money.
After auditing and managing hundreds of accounts, I realised just how often people neglect the importance of an effective campaign structure. One campaign with one ad group with all your products is not gonna cut it. For this client, we applied a campaign structure that’s a little bit different from what you usually see in ad accounts. It includes creating three completely identical campaigns with the same structure, ad groups and products. The only different thing is:
- Negative Keyword Lists
- Your Bids
The three campaigns we have created had different priorities levels – low, medium and high priority. We have then developed our negative keywords lists to apply for each of the campaigns,
The first negative keyword list we developed was a global/generic list and it included every keyword we want to block our ads from showing, such as brands we don’t carry and queries that include “how-to” or instructions. We have then applied this negative keyword list to all three campaigns.
The second list we created consisted of the brand names we carry, such as Duravit and Hansgrohe – the leading brands in the bathroom industry.
The third keyword list we developed was dedicated to brands +product specifics, for example, ‘Hansgrohe – Croma Select E 180 2’.
After completing the lists, we have applied them to the campaigns and set the bids according to the priority level and user intent.
The first campaign set as high priority had all three keyword list applied which served as a filter to serve ads only for the most generic and broad terms. The bids we set were the lowest of the three campaigns because we are targeting users at the very beginning of their buying process and don’t want to spend too much as the CR is expected to be low.
The second campaign was set at the medium priority and had the generic negative keyword lists applied as well as the brand + product specifics. In this case, we targeted users who are aware of our brand but are still not searching for highly specific features of the product. The bids were 50% higher compared to the high priority campaign.
The last campaign was set as the low priority campaign and was targeting the very bottom of the funnel. This campaign had no negative keywords applied besides the generic negative keyword list. Bids were the highest of all three campaigns.
We have let the campaigns run for 30 days before evaluating the performance and making comparisons. After a month, we have seen a significant increase in sales, conversion rate, revenue and ROI across the campaigns. All this while lowering the average cost per click by 56%.
On average, the return on ad spend increased by 653,85 which allowed us to invest significantly more in brands previously struggling with negative ROI. Thanks to detailed targeting using negative keywords and bid optimisation, we increased the conversion rate by 48%. After only 30 days, it became clear the campaign structure we applied was the best use of the ad budget to deliver high ROI.
Religiously optimising the keyword lists and bids for each of the three campaigns, we managed to increase the sales by 300% and total revenue by 98.94%.