mkurman/google-ads

|------|--------|--------------|---------| | PMF testing | Pre-PMF; validate idea before building | $47–500; start small | Simple LP: headline, benefits, problem solved, CTA ("Join Waitlist," "Get Early Access") | CTR, sign-up rate, bounce rate; low CTR/high bounce = messaging/positioning issue | | Conversion-driven | PMF validated; commercialization | Scale; ROAS target | Full funnel; ad-to-page alignment | ROAS, CAC, conversion rate |

PMF testing: No full product needed. Build landing page with Unbounce, Carrd, or Webflow. Run ads to relevant search terms; measure clicks, engagement, signups. Test messaging (e.g., "Fastest App for Freelancers" vs "Simplest Time Tracker for Teams"), pricing (different price points in ads/LP), and audiences (keyword targeting, in-market). Allow 4–6 weeks for PMax learning phase. Use as learning tool, not just marketing channel.

Reference: Marketing Cactus – Using Google Ads to Test Product-Market Fit

Campaign Structure

Account
├── Campaign: Brand (Search)
├── Campaign: Non-Brand (Search)
├── Campaign: Competitor (Search) — optional; bid on competitor brand + "alternative"/"vs"
├── Campaign: Retargeting (Display)
└── Campaign: Performance Max

Competitor Brand Keywords

When: Bid on "Competitor] alternative," "Competitor] vs You]" to intercept high-intent traffic. Google allows competitor terms as keywords; you cannot use competitor names in ad copy without permission.

Landing page: Use a dedicated landing page (comparison/alternatives page), not a blog article. Users searching competitor brands expect direct alternatives—a blog increases bounce; a comparison page matches intent and converts better. See alternatives-page-generator for structure.

Best practices:

• Separate campaign; exact/phrase match; add your brand as negative
• H1 mirrors search intent (e.g., "Competitor] vs You]")
• Feature comparison table; one-line differentiator; strong CTA
• Expect lower Quality Score, higher CPC than non-brand; optimize LP relevance

Naming: GOOG_[Objective]_[Audience]_[Offer]_[Date] (e.g., GOOG_Search_Brand_Demo_Ongoing)

Campaign Types

| Type | Best for | |------|----------| | Search | High-intent queries; keyword-targeted; landing page critical | | Display | Awareness; retargeting; broader reach | | YouTube | Video; awareness; consideration | | Performance Max | Automated; cross-channel; feed + search + display |

Performance Max (PMax) Optimization

Learning period: Run at least 6 weeks for algorithm ramp-up. Works best as complement to Search, not replacement.

Asset groups: Organize by audience intent (e.g., high-intent searchers, cart abandoners, category researchers), not product category alone. Audience signals improve CPA and ROAS vs. no signals.

Asset requirements (per asset group):

• ≥5 images (include 1200×1200)
• ≥5 text assets (4 headlines, 5 descriptions)
• Video when possible
• Refresh creative regularly to maintain performance

Signals: Add remarketing lists and Customer Match to accelerate learning.

Weekly health check: Flag if brand terms >30% of conversions; unexpected geo conversions; any placement >15% of total spend; asset group performance below "Good."

Keyword Strategy

• Brand: Protect brand terms; exclude from non-brand campaigns
• Negative keywords: Build weekly; avoid irrelevant queries. Add support terms (login, forum, pricing, help) from keyword-research—these are existing customers, not prospects.
• Match types: Broad (discovery) → Phrase → Exact (control)

Keyword sources: Use keyword-research for keyword list, clusters, and intent. Map each cluster to a dedicated landing page; relevance improves Quality Score and lowers CPC.

Quality Score Levers

| Factor | Action | |--------|--------| | Expected CTR | Improve ad relevance; test headlines | | Ad relevance | Align ad copy to keyword intent | | Landing page | Ad-to-page alignment; fast load; mobile-friendly |

Target: Quality Score ≥6; higher = lower CPC, better ad rank. Benchmark: Improving Quality Score from 5 to 7 can reduce CPC by 30–50%.

Bidding Strategy

| Conversions/month | Strategy | |-------------------|----------| | <30 | Manual CPC (smart bidding needs volume to optimize) | | 30–50 | Target CPA; minimum for effective smart bidding | | 50–100 | Target CPA | | 100+ | Target ROAS |

Smart bidding: AI-powered bidding (Target CPA, Target ROAS) typically delivers better ROI than manual when conversion volume is sufficient; requires ≥30 conversions in 30 days to work effectively.

Tracking

• Enhanced Conversions: Server-side signals for better attribution
• Offline conversion imports: B2B; CRM → Google Ads
• UTM: Consistent parameters for GA4 cross-check

Paid–Organic Cannibalization

When you rank organically (position 4+) for a keyword and also run PPC, paid ads can absorb clicks that would go to organic. Audit: Cross-reference GSC organic rankings with Search Terms report. If organic ranks well, test pausing PPC on those terms to free budget for higher-impact keywords.

Reference: Backlinko – SEO and PPC: 8 Smart Ways to Align

Pre-Launch Checklist

• ] Conversion tracking tested with real conversion
• ] Landing page loads <3s; mobile-friendly
• ] UTM parameters working
• ] Negative keyword list built (include support terms from keyword-research)
• ] Budget set; targeting matches audience

Related Skills

• pmf-strategy: PMF validation framework; when to use PMF testing vs conversion-driven
• paid-ads-strategy: Channel selection; budget allocation; ad-to-page alignment; competitor brand bidding
• alternatives-page-generator: Competitor brand keyword ads → dedicated LP (not blog); comparison page structure
• keyword-research: Keyword list, clusters, intent; support terms for negative keywords; PPC data feeds back SEO priority
• traffic-analysis: UTM for attribution; paid–organic cannibalization audit
• landing-page-generator: LP structure for paid traffic; PAA → FAQ
• analytics-tracking: Conversion tracking; ROAS measurement