13 November, 2024.
The Google Ads disaster we turned into a $706K success story.
Let’s cut to the chase: the first Google Ads campaign for this client was a total disaster. They are an online education provider based in Geneva, and they had high hopes for Google Ads. They were clear on what they wanted: drive more enrollments for their online courses. Simple enough, right?
It should have been easy for a platform offering in-demand skills and certifications to convert clicks into paying students. But the reality was far from it.
Instead of seeing an influx of eager students, they faced an uncomfortably high cost-per-click and low conversion rates. Traffic flooded their site, but the conversions were nowhere to be found. There was a gaping chasm between what they expected and what they got.
The first campaign failed so miserably that they could have easily given up on the entire idea of using Google Ads for online education. However, this is where the story gets interesting. Instead of walking away, we rolled up our sleeves and went back to the drawing board.
What followed was a journey of trial, error, and improvement. What started as a $43.7K loss turned into a whopping $706K success. That’s not just a minor improvement—this was a complete transformation. A campaign that seemed destined for failure became a success story that anyone in digital marketing would be proud to tell.
But this wasn’t just about a bigger budget or more ads. It was about changing the mindset and strategy. From rethinking how we targeted the right audience to optimizing creatives and cutting out inefficiencies, every move was calculated. And it paid off—big time.
In the next sections, you’re going to see exactly how we went from disastrous results to one of the most profitable campaigns this client has ever run. The lessons learned in this journey are invaluable. This isn’t just a story about running ads. It’s about pivoting, learning from mistakes, and relentless determination.
Understanding the client’s needs.
When this online education platform came to us, their goals were crystal clear. They wanted to increase enrollments for their courses, specifically targeting high-intent individuals who were ready to invest in their education. They weren’t looking for random clicks—they wanted qualified leads. They wanted conversions, not just traffic.
But here's the catch: they were aiming to do all of this without breaking the bank. Their budget wasn’t infinite, and they had to get results within a defined timeframe. Online education is a competitive market, especially in a place like Geneva, where big institutions and established online platforms already dominate the space. So, the pressure was on.
Now, while the goals were clear, the approach wasn’t. The client didn’t have a solid understanding of how Google Ads worked in this particular niche. They didn’t realize how nuanced and precise targeting had to be to compete effectively. They wanted to cast a wide net, hoping to catch anyone remotely interested in online education. And that’s where the problems began.
They underestimated the importance of targeting high-intent users—people actively searching for online courses in their specific niche, with clear intent to enroll. They thought if they simply increased their reach, they could attract students, but they were overlooking the critical factor: relevancy.
The result? A deluge of clicks, but not the kind that would generate actual business. The traffic was coming in, but the wrong kind of people were clicking. And when the conversions didn’t follow, it was clear something had to change.
So, the problem wasn’t just a lack of clicks—it was a lack of quality clicks. And with every click costing them money, the ROI was dismal. In a market as competitive as online education, simply having traffic isn’t enough. It’s about bringing the right traffic, and that’s where the strategy was off-track.
This is a critical lesson for any business looking to scale with Google Ads: it’s not about reaching the most people—it’s about reaching the right people.
Why the first campaign failed...
The first campaign was, honestly, a textbook example of how not to do Google Ads. But it wasn’t just bad luck—it was the result of several strategic missteps that could have been avoided with a clearer understanding of the market and audience.
First, let’s talk about the targeting. The client had a broad approach, casting their net as wide as possible. They thought that reaching everyone interested in education was the best strategy, but in reality, this diluted the effectiveness of their ads.
By targeting too many people, they ended up wasting money on clicks from users who weren’t even close to being ready to enroll. This is the classic problem with generic targeting in a competitive market: you end up paying for traffic that doesn’t convert.
What they failed to realize is that online education isn’t a “one size fits all” industry. There are specific needs, pain points, and buyer personas within this market that require tailored messaging and precise targeting.
Instead of trying to reach everyone, the goal should have been to pinpoint the people who were actively seeking online courses that matched the client’s offerings—students who were ready to invest.
Then came the ad creatives. The visuals and copy were underwhelming, to say the least. They didn’t grab attention or address the core pain points of potential students.
The ads didn’t speak to the why behind enrolling in the course, nor did they convey the how this online education platform could solve those problems. The messaging was bland, and in a market as competitive as online education, bland is a death sentence.
Let’s talk numbers. The CPC of $4.26 was already high for this type of campaign, but when you consider that the conversion rate didn’t justify the spend, it becomes even worse. The cost per conversion? $42.84. That’s a terrible figure, especially when you factor in that the leads weren’t qualified. A business can’t sustain that kind of burn rate for long without real, tangible results.
So, what happened here? A broad targeting approach combined with weak creatives led to an influx of clicks, but zero conversions. It was like trying to sell a high-ticket item to window shoppers.
The money was going out, but nothing substantial was coming in. The result: a Google Ads campaign that drained resources without delivering any meaningful return on investment.
In short, the first campaign failed because it wasn’t specific enough, it wasn’t targeted, and it didn’t connect with the audience. And that’s the hard truth. But that’s also where the learning began.
Phase One: The initial campaign (The worst campaign).
Let’s be real: this campaign was a mess. It started with the client’s goal of boosting enrollments and ended with wasted ad spend and no conversions to show for it. And while the client was understandably frustrated, this failure was crucial in getting us to the real game-changer.
Here’s how we kicked things off: The strategy was too broad, and the targeting was based on vague parameters like "online education" rather than focusing on the ideal student profiles who were actively searching for a solution like the one the client offered. So, what did we get? Clicks, sure, but those clicks came from people who had zero intention of signing up for the courses. High traffic, low interest.
The ad creatives? Don’t even get me started. They were generic, uninspired, and lacked any clear call to action. In a space like online education, where you’re competing for people’s limited attention, this simply wasn’t going to cut it. The ads didn’t speak to pain points or address the urgency that potential students felt. They didn’t show the real value behind the courses.
And that cost-per-click? It was through the roof. A $4.26 CPC for a campaign that didn’t generate any real traction is a disaster in itself. Add to that a $42.84 cost per conversion, and it was clear this campaign was heading nowhere fast. It wasn’t just underperforming—it was losing money.
At this point, the numbers were so bad that it was easy to think that Google Ads just wasn’t going to work for this client. But that’s where most people would have quit. We didn’t. We analyzed every aspect of the campaign, dissected what went wrong, and learned from it.
It wasn’t about giving up; it was about recalibrating and doing better next time.
Campaign 1 results: The shocking numbers behind the failure.
Now, let’s break down the cold, hard numbers behind Campaign 1. These results were far from the kind of success we were hoping for, but they provide invaluable insight into where things went wrong and how we could pivot going forward.
First up: clicks. The campaign generated 10.3K clicks. On paper, that might seem like a lot of traffic, but as we all know in the world of Google Ads, not all clicks are created equal. The quality of the clicks matters more than the quantity, and unfortunately, in this case, those 10,300 clicks didn’t lead to the results we needed. Instead of enrolling students, we were simply buying traffic that didn’t convert.
Then, there’s the conversions. Out of all that traffic, only 1.02K people actually converted. That means about 90% of the clicks didn’t turn into leads, and that’s a huge red flag. The conversions weren’t just low—they were alarmingly so, especially given the cost involved. This highlights how misaligned the campaign was with the target audience’s needs and intentions.
Now, let’s talk about the Cost per Click. At $4.26, it’s clear that the campaign was expensive. For a campaign like this, where you’re not getting the return you want, a high CPC is problematic. Why? Because you’re paying for each click, and if those clicks don’t lead to conversions, you’re essentially burning money. This would have been unsustainable for any business looking to scale.
But here’s the kicker: the Cost per Conversion came in at $42.84. This wasn’t just high—it was excessive. A $42.84 cost per conversion for an online education business, where the average course might cost hundreds or even thousands of dollars, doesn’t make sense. The gap between what was spent and what was earned was too large. This is where the wheels started to fall off the campaign, and we knew that we had to make some serious changes.
So, what do these numbers tell us? They show us that the strategy was wrong from the get-go. The targeting was off, the creatives didn’t hit the mark, and most importantly, the money wasn’t working hard enough to generate results. At this point, the client was understandably frustrated, but we knew that failure wasn’t final. We were determined to find the right approach.
Phase two: Shifting strategies to focus on results (The best campaign).
The first campaign was a wake-up call. The numbers were disappointing, but they provided us with the clarity we needed to make real improvements. We knew the first campaign didn’t deliver, so we took a step back, reevaluated everything, and came up with a completely new strategy.
Instead of just throwing more money at ads and hoping for a miracle, we decided to focus on refining our approach. We wanted a strategy that was results-driven—one that would allow us to reach the right people, with the right message, at the right time.
We started by narrowing down the audience. Rather than targeting broad, generalized keywords like “online education” or “learn from home,” we began focusing on more specific terms. We honed in on high-intent keywords that would attract people who were actively searching for courses in their field of interest. We didn’t want people who were “just browsing”; we needed individuals who were seriously looking for solutions and were willing to invest in their education.
Next, we took a hard look at the creatives. The ads in the first campaign didn’t resonate with the audience, and that was a major problem. We revamped the messaging to speak directly to the pain points of our target students.
We crafted compelling, action-driven headlines and calls to action that spoke to the value of enrolling in these online courses, focusing on how they could help people level up in their careers or gain the skills they needed to succeed.
We also reduced the waste in our ad spend. Instead of spreading the budget thin across irrelevant or underperforming keywords, we allocated the funds to the best-performing segments. This wasn’t about increasing the budget—it was about optimizing how we spent each dollar.
What followed was a complete transformation. The new campaign wasn’t just about generating traffic; it was about generating the right traffic—the kind that was ready to convert. And the results? They were night and day compared to the previous campaign
Campaign 2 results: The impact of optimization.
When we launched Campaign 2, we knew we were taking a calculated risk. But we were also confident that our new strategy, backed by data-driven decisions, would yield better results. And boy, did it ever.
Let’s start with the most striking difference: clicks. Campaign 2 generated a staggering 294K clicks. This is a huge leap from the previous campaign’s 10.3K clicks, but more importantly, it’s the quality of these clicks that makes all the difference.
We weren’t just getting traffic for the sake of it—we were bringing in highly-targeted, relevant users who were much more likely to convert.
And conversions? A total of 32.8K. That’s 32,800 people who didn’t just visit the site—they took action. This was a massive improvement over the 1.02K conversions from the first campaign. The high-quality clicks we brought in were paying off.
But here’s the real win: the Cost per Conversion dropped to $21.52. That’s a remarkable 50% reduction in cost per conversion from the previous campaign’s $42.84. Not only did we cut costs, but we also brought in more leads at a lower price.
This is the power of optimization—taking the data, learning from it, and refining the strategy to make every dollar spent work harder for you.
Of course, we didn’t just stop there. We continued to monitor the performance and made small adjustments as needed, but the overall direction was clear: the new approach was working. The campaign wasn’t just profitable—it was scalable. This was the kind of result the client had been hoping for all along, and it was a direct result of optimizing the campaign based on lessons learned from the first failure.
At this point, the client was thrilled. They could now see the potential that Google Ads had to offer. They were getting high-quality leads at a fraction of the cost, and the numbers spoke for themselves. The journey from failure to success wasn’t just about luck—it was about strategy, optimization, and relentless testing.
Key insights and lessons learned.
The journey from failure to success with this Google Ads campaign didn’t just yield impressive numbers—it also brought invaluable lessons that we’ll carry forward in every future campaign. Reflecting on the entire process, several key insights stand out that shaped the successful turnaround.
First and foremost, targeting was the most crucial element we learned to refine. In the beginning, the broad targeting strategy that aimed to cast a wide net simply didn’t work. In a competitive industry like online education, where the audience is fragmented and discerning, you can’t afford to be vague.
As we dug into the data, we realized that success came down to reaching people who were already looking for a solution—not those casually browsing. By narrowing the focus to those actively searching for online education options, we were able to significantly cut wasteful spending and bring in high-quality leads.
We also learned just how essential ad creatives are to campaign success. Our first set of ads didn’t speak to the real desires and pain points of our audience.
They were too generic and lacked the emotional pull needed to inspire action.
After we reevaluated the messaging in the second phase, we crafted copy that was much more aligned with what prospective students were looking for—clear, solution-driven, and packed with benefits that spoke directly to their needs.
When you’re in a space like online education, where competition is fierce, an ad’s creative must cut through the noise and grab attention. That’s what we achieved in the second campaign, and it made all the difference.
Beyond just targeting and creatives, we discovered that optimization is not a one-time fix—it’s an ongoing process. Even when a campaign is running well, the work isn’t finished. Each element of the campaign needs to be constantly monitored, adjusted, and tested. This is where many campaigns falter—when people get complacent and stop tweaking the ads, the targeting, or the budget allocation.
For us, every dollar had to be spent in the most effective way possible, and this meant constantly iterating based on real-time data. With each tweak, we saw improvements—sometimes small, sometimes huge—but the result was always a more efficient, effective campaign.
Perhaps the most important lesson was that data-driven decisions are the foundation of any successful campaign. Throughout both campaigns, we didn’t rely on assumptions or guesswork. Instead, we used data to drive every decision—from choosing the right keywords to identifying where to scale back or increase spend.
The metrics were our guide, showing us exactly what was working and what wasn’t. And this approach isn’t just for big agencies or seasoned marketers; it’s a mindset that any business—large or small—can adopt to optimize their advertising efforts. Data doesn’t lie.
Finally, the entire process reinforced one crucial takeaway: failure isn’t final. The first campaign was, by all accounts, a disaster. But that didn’t mean the end of the road. In fact, we saw it as an opportunity to learn, grow, and do better next time.
There’s a certain grit that comes with running ads—where failure is just part of the game. The key is in how you respond to those failures. We didn’t give up or throw in the towel. Instead, we used the mistakes from the first campaign to fuel the strategy for the second campaign, ultimately leading to success.
This mindset of constant improvement and refusal to be discouraged is what turned the tide for us and helped us deliver the $706K success story.
This journey wasn’t easy. It wasn’t a simple fix that came with one or two changes. But with patience, data, and a willingness to learn from our mistakes, we transformed a failed Google Ads campaign into a resounding success. And these lessons are ones that will continue to guide us, no matter what challenges we face next.
Audience evolution and targeting adjustments.
In any digital marketing campaign, particularly in the competitive world of online education, one of the biggest hurdles is getting your targeting right. When we started this journey, the first campaign lacked the precision needed to effectively reach the right people. While we knew our target demographic, the initial targeting was too broad, casting a wide net with hopes of capturing anyone remotely interested.
But as we dug deeper into the performance data, we discovered that the key to success lies in narrowing your focus. The shift in strategy came when we realized we weren’t just looking for “anyone” who might be interested in online education—we needed to pinpoint those individuals who were already in-market, actively searching for solutions.
This meant adjusting our targeting to focus on people who had already shown intent through search behaviors and website visits, leveraging data signals that told us exactly who was likely to convert.
The first campaign’s broad targeting simply wasn’t enough. But in phase two, we got granular—we utilized advanced targeting options, like remarketing, lookalike audiences, and refined interest categories, to pinpoint the right prospects. By focusing on people who had already shown interest in education, or who fit specific demographic profiles, we saw engagement levels skyrocket.
The targeting adjustments weren’t just about reducing wasted ad spend—they were about increasing the relevance of the ads, making them resonate with the audience. And that, in turn, led to more conversions.
Through these strategic shifts, we learned that the right audience is everything. It’s not about reaching the most people; it’s about reaching the most qualified people—those who have the highest likelihood of converting. And that’s exactly what we managed to achieve in Campaign 2: an audience that was not just broad but also highly relevant.
The role of data-driven decisions in campaign success.
In digital advertising, there’s a saying: “What gets measured gets managed." When it comes to running effective Google Ads campaigns, data is everything.
And one of the major reasons we were able to turn our initial failure into a $706K success story is because we made data our guiding principle.
In Campaign 1, we had data—we were tracking clicks, conversions, and costs—but we weren’t fully leveraging it to drive decisions.
After analyzing the results, we realized we weren’t digging deep enough into the data to see what really mattered.
We needed to adjust our strategy based on real-time feedback from the campaign, not just look at the overall picture.
For Campaign 2, we changed our approach entirely. We refined our key performance indicators to focus on metrics that would directly contribute to achieving our goals.
Instead of just looking at clicks and impressions, we paid close attention to cost-per-conversion, click-through rate, and customer lifetime value.
We also started doing A/B testing on a scale we hadn’t before—testing headlines, CTAs, and ad creatives, and then using the results to optimize each aspect of the campaign in real time.
By actively monitoring campaign performance and adjusting based on these insights, we were able to maximize efficiency and dramatically reduce wasted spend.
Every time the data told us something wasn’t working, we made changes. When it told us something was working, we doubled down.
The result was a campaign that continuously improved and refined itself, ultimately delivering the stellar results we see today.
The data also gave us critical insights into user behavior. We were able to track exactly how people interacted with the ads and landing pages, which allowed us to identify friction points and make improvements.
Whether it was tweaking a landing page for better conversions or adjusting the bid strategy to reach high-converting users at the right times, the data was our roadmap to success.
This data-driven approach wasn’t just a one-time decision—it became the backbone of everything we did, and it’s something we continue to apply in every campaign we manage. The bottom line is simple: if you’re not constantly refining your approach based on data, you’re leaving money on the table. And the more granular you get with the data, the better your results will be.
Results overview: A snapshot of success.
By now, you’ve seen the ups and downs of this journey. But what does the overall picture look like when you compare the two campaigns side by side? The difference is nothing short of remarkable.
Campaign 1:
Campaign 2:
These numbers speak for themselves. While Campaign 1 struggled with high costs and low conversion efficiency, Campaign 2 achieved a staggering improvement. In the second phase, we saw a dramatic decrease in cost per click, and more importantly, a sharp drop in cost per conversion, signaling that the optimizations we implemented were paying off.
But beyond just the raw numbers, the impact of this shift was felt at a much deeper level. By cutting wasted spend and focusing on the right audience with targeted messaging, the client achieved impressive returns on their investment. This was no longer a case of spending money just to get clicks; it was about using every dollar strategically to drive real results.
Looking at these results, it’s clear that optimization and strategic shifts made all the difference. The transition from a failed campaign to a highly successful one wasn’t an accident—it was the outcome of data-driven decisions, constant iteration, and a clear focus on what mattered most: bringing in the right leads at the right cost.
From setback to success.
At the end of the day, this journey is about more than just a set of numbers or a story of success—it’s about the power of resilience and strategic adjustment. The transformation from a Google Ads disaster to a $706K success didn’t happen overnight. It took a mindset of constant learning, adapting, and optimizing. But what really made the difference was a commitment to data-driven decision-making and a willingness to embrace failure as part of the journey.
For this client, based in Geneva, the road to success was filled with lessons learned, missteps corrected, and strategic pivots that ultimately led to massive growth. What started as a costly, ineffective campaign ended as a shining example of how the right optimizations can turn things around and deliver exceptional ROI.
And here’s the biggest takeaway: this success wasn’t a fluke. It’s a replicable formula. With the right approach, any business—whether they’re in online education, e-commerce, or another industry—can achieve similar results by embracing the principles of data-driven decision-making, testing, and refining their campaigns over time.
If you’re looking to take your Google Ads campaigns to the next level, don’t settle for mediocre results. Reach out to us and let’s craft a personalized, data-driven strategy that will turn your campaigns from good to great. We’ve done it before, and we can do it for you too.
If you’ve read through this case study and found the insights valuable, it’s time to take a step back and evaluate your own digital marketing efforts.
Whether you’re running Google Ads campaigns, diving into new platforms, or simply looking for ways to optimize your existing strategies, the key to success lies in continuous improvement.
Take a moment to review your current campaigns, analyze your data, and consider how you can adjust your approach for better results. The power of optimization is in your hands.
FAQs
1. How do you determine pricing for your Google Ads management services?
Our pricing is based on the specific needs and scale of each campaign. We typically start with a minimum retainer of £1,000 per month, which covers the ongoing management, optimization, and strategy for your campaigns. This fee ensures that we can provide consistent, high-level attention and support to get your campaigns performing at their best. The actual ad spend is determined by your budget and business objectives. We always make sure that every pound you invest in ad spend is used to generate measurable results and maximize your return on investment.
2. What made Campaign 1 such a "disaster"?
Campaign 1 had a number of challenges that we weren’t able to overcome initially, such as poor targeting and ineffective ad creatives. We learned that the key to improving performance wasn’t just throwing more money into the campaign, but rather diving deeper into data and refining the approach. After reviewing the results, we understood the areas where we could optimize, and that’s when the transformation began.
3. How long did it take to turn the campaign around after the adjustments were made?
The transformation didn’t happen overnight. After making strategic changes to the ad creatives, targeting, and messaging in Campaign 2, we began seeing a marked improvement within 3 to 4 weeks. However, the full impact of these changes was felt over a longer period, as continuous testing and optimization led to progressively better results. Patience and data-driven decision-making were key to making Campaign 2 a success.
4. What do you consider the most important factor in this campaign’s success?
The most critical factor in turning the campaign around was the continuous optimization and data-driven approach. Rather than relying on intuition or assumptions, we let the data guide us every step of the way—whether it was about refining targeting, improving creatives, or adjusting the budget allocation. It’s all about responding to what the data tells you, testing, and adapting accordingly.
5. Why is focusing on targeting so crucial in campaigns like this?
Targeting is everything when it comes to paid ads. If you're not reaching the right audience, even the best creatives and strategies will fall short. In this case, after reviewing the initial campaign, we realized that the key to success was refining our audience targeting to ensure we were speaking to people who were most likely to convert. The more accurately we can define the audience, the better the results, and that’s where we saw massive improvements in Campaign 2.
