It’s easy to feel as if just when we get something dialed in, the world changes.
Such was the case this past summer, when, after months of “going strong” with our campaigns, the John Oliver backlash hit.
People asked us “is anything working for you guys?”
Truth-be-told, we’d seen conversions go down.
It seemed like people were growing ever-more-suspicious of the treatment industry as-a-whole, and were reluctant to trust anyone.
The situation challenged us to make our campaigns even tighter, and figure out with even greater certainty what was producing the conversions.
The client in question was the owner of a well-known pair of treatment centers in southern California.
First-Things-First - The Results
We’re happy to say we were able to beat our usual volume results by six weeks into this campaign, and come in at the medium-low end of our target cost-per-qualified-lead by the last two weeks.
Here’s a screen shot of the results:
And here’s a screen shot of the cost-per-qualified-lead:
Refresher - a “qualified lead” is somebody who’s reported private insurance on our intake form, and consented to speak with an admissions rep.
If $625 seems high, think about this: how many people with qualified insurance, seeking treatment at your center, and enthusiastic to speak with you, would your admissions staff have to speak to before one admitted?
What We Learned
One of the first things we learned was that women comprised the vast majority of the responses from Facebook. As they were so much easier to reach, we focused on them with the majority of our advertising.
As with many of our campaigns, a series of small, incremental improvements eventually “opened the floodgates”. (To see actual campaign creative, and learn more about the exact strategy we’ve developed, click here.)
Here were a few:
We ended up having to test a ton of different audiences before we found some combinations of interests, geography, and lookalikes that “hit”.
Here’s a screen shot of the “optimization doc” we used. Check out all the “grayed out” audiences.
The first thing that moved the needle was a very specific combination of ad copy and photos.
The next was using the right lookalikes. Counter-intuitively, for one campaign, a combination of a lookalike from the client’s past clients, plus some interests, worked best, while for another, a legacy lookalike from an older client worked better.
With past campaigns, we’d found that direct-to-offer ads had produced a bunch of the early leads, but that number was lower with this client, leading us to conjecture that those who eventually requested a call were taking more time to do it, which fits with the general post-Oliver cynicism.
Finally, a simple adaptation to the landing page produced nearly double the conversion rate.
What This Shows
Having been through this crucible showed us two things:
First, it’s not only still possible to reach good treatment candidates on Facebook, but, in this era of increased cynicism about most treatment centers, there’s huge opportunity for the centers who can get in front of their prospective clients early, supply helpful information, and implement systematic, gentle follow-up.
To learn more about what it’s like to work with us, just click here.