Azul all,
The Google Ad campaign promoting immigration to Talossa has spent the budgeted amount of $50 (in fact, it spent a total of $53.97, but I will spot the unauthorized $3.97). It was running for just over a month, from the beginning of October until when I paused it a few minutes ago.
The campaign had 1,690 impressions (that is, it was shown 1,690 times), which resulted in 54 clicks. This means we are paying just about $1 per click. The ad looked like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/6yJaY2V.png)
For 49 of the 54 people who clicked the ad, Google is showing me the term they were searching for when they saw the ad. 18 of them had just searched "micronation" and the rest included a term specifically about Talossa. Advertising to the latter group obviously wouldn't be as impactful (since they were searching for Talossa already), although the cost per click for that group was lower.
-Average cost per click for the 18 people who searched "micronation" = $1.25
-Average cost per click for the 31 people who were searching for Talossa = $0.70
However, the most important metric is, of course, how many more applications we got because of the ads. During the campaign period, there was one applicant that indicated he had heard about Talossa via Google Ad (Emmanuel Olusan).
Perhaps the sample size is still too small, but spending $50 to get one application is not exactly a great return on investment.
Well done. This is actual research and data, as opposed to the traditional Talossan way of making decisions based on "reckons and vibes".
Very interesting! I am glad that we finally tried this. There might be some tweaks we can do to make it more effective, but either way it's satisfying to see an idea implemented. Thank you for the report and the good analysis.
Txec suggested Twitter ads -- that might also be something to consider. I'd bet we'll be able to get a bargain these days.
I'm blocking every advertiser I see on Twitter on principle. Not one red cent for Apartheid Clyde.