Lower cost per action with Facebook and Instagram placement optimization
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•267 views
This document features placement case studies.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Lower cost per action with Facebook and Instagram placement optimization
Similar to Lower cost per action with Facebook and Instagram placement optimization (20)
More from BlitzMetrics
More from BlitzMetrics (18)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Lower cost per action with Facebook and Instagram placement optimization
- 1. MVMT 20% lower cost per action with placement optimization (vs. Facebook and Instagram separately) 1
- 2. UGO (TD Bank) 45% lower cost per install with placement optimization (vs. Facebook alone) 2
- 3. Kanui Comparable cost per install and 2.8x better ROI with placement optimization (vs. Facebook and Instagram separately) 3
- 4. Teachers (TV Land) 16% increase in impressions by adding Instagram as a placement 21% increase in brand awareness across Facebook and Instagram 4 2,200 likes teachersseries Reading, writing, a righteous hangover. Catch up on Teachers on demand or with the app! view all 711 comments teachersseries
- 5. Additional case studies Advertiser Country Vertical Objective Placement s Results GMS Hub Link TV Land US Entertainme nt Brand Awareness Facebook Instagram • 16% increase in impressions • 24% increase in ad recall • 21% increase in brand awareness https://our.intern.facebook.com/intern/ma rketingcontent/gmshubv2/content/?id=10 93786793998298 World Golf Tour US Gaming Mobile App Installs Facebook Instagram • 44% lower CPI https://our.intern.facebook.com/intern/ma rketingcontent/gmshubv2/content/?id=18 2732855452510 TM Lewin UK eCommerce Website Conversions Facebook Instagram • 9x decrease in cost per acquisition https://our.intern.facebook.com/intern/ma rketingcontent/gmshubv2/content/?id=94 3187659129003 MVMT US eCommerce Website Conversions Facebook Instagram • 3x lower cost per acquisition https://our.intern.facebook.com/intern/ma rketingcontent/gmshubv2/content/?id=45 1317691691464 5
- 6. Appendix: When manually optimizing may lead to worse results 6
- 7. 7 Breaking down the efficiency of running across the family of apps Outcomes Price per Outcome Bid needed to deliver campaign Average cost per outcome by placement Bid Price per Outcome Outcomes $3$2 $4 Average cost per outcome per placement $4.5 0
- 8. 8 Outcomes Price per Outcome Bid needed to deliver campaign Average cost per outcome by placement Bid Price per Outcome Outcomes $3$2 $4 Average cost per outcome per placement $4.5 0 Instagram has the highest cost per outcome. Should we remove it? Breaking down the efficiency of running across the family of apps
- 9. 9 Let’s see what happens… Outcomes Price per Outcome Average cost per outcome by placement Bid Price per Outcome Outcomes $3$2 $4.5 0 $6$3.50 We had to increase our bid to drive the same amount of outcomesWe lost cheaper Instagram outcomes We had to buy more expensive Facebook outcomes 1 3 2 4 Our average price per outcome on Facebook rose
Editor's Notes
- [PUBLIC] MVMT [pronounced ”movement”] (eCommerce, US) watches saw a 20% lower cost per click (CPC) and cost per action (CPA) when opting in to placement optimization across Facebook and Instagram (vs. running on the two platforms separately). Client Quote: “MVMT Watches has been extremely happy with not only Instagram ad performance in general, but with how easy it was to build Instagram into our overall strategy by simply allowing us to buy Instagram as another placement, instead of having to manage another separate platform.”
- [PUBLIC] UGO (part of TD Bank, Canada) saw a 45% lower cost per install by moving to performance optimization across Facebook and Instagram for their mobile app install campaigns (vs. Facebook mobile news feed-only campaigns).
- [PUBLIC] Kanui (ecommerce, Brazil) ran a mobile app install campaign initially targeting men 18+ on Facebook. When they added Instagram to their Facebook ad set, they saw a similar cost per install and generated a 2.8x higher return on ad spend. “We were so pleased by the outcome of our ads on Instagram and Facebook that we’re changing all of our ad sets to run across both platforms going forward,” says Guilherme Becker, Performance Director at Kanui.
- [PUBLIC]
- [INTERNAL ONLY]
- You may have questions about creative. In particular, are you required to run the same creative across every placement? Since Facebook creative automatically extends to Audience Network, we’ll focus on Instagram today.
- Many times, running an ad set across Facebook, Instagram and the Audience Network will result in reporting that varies by placement. In this example, Audience Network provides the least amount of outcomes, but produces the cheapeast cost per outcome ($2). Facebook provides the most outcomes and the median cost per outcome ($3). Instagram provides more outcomes than the Audience Network, but is the most expensive on a cost per outcome basis ($4). For this campaign, it was determined we needed to bid a maximum of $4.50 in order to pace the campaign and drive the desired number of outcomes.
- Many times, running an ad set across Facebook, Instagram and the Audience Network will result in reporting that varies by placement. In this example, Audience Network provides the least amount of outcomes, but produces the cheapeast cost per outcome ($2). Facebook provides the most outcomes and the median cost per outcome ($3). Instagram provides more outcomes than the Audience Network, but is the most expensive on a cost per outcome basis ($4). For this campaign, it was determined we needed to bid a maximum of $4.50 in order to pace the campaign and drive the desired number of outcomes.
- When you remove Instagram from the ad set, you remove all of the outcomes Instagram could have driven. Our auction now has to find outcomes to replace all the outcomes we lost when we removed Instagram. In order to do that, we have to look to the more expensive end of the Facebook curve. We have to increase the bid to $6 in order to drive the same amount of outcomes we drove before. We have to increase the bid because we are replacing chearper Instagram outcomes with more expensive Facebook outcomes. We lost the cheaper outcomes we could have driven with Instagram To make up for the lost Instagram outcomes, we have to buy more expensive outcomes on Facebook. The average price per outcome rises to $3.50 on Facebook after we add the more expensive Facebook outcomes we bought over the life of the campaign. After removing Instagram, our cost per outcome on AN remains the same and rises on FB. The new price per outcome average on FB is not as high as IG’s was prior to removing. Was this a successful optimization? No. You traded cheaper outcomes for more expensive outcomes and made the entire campaign more expensive.