4 ms·

After spending $~25 on ads and getting absolutely no conversion, I can assure you Facebook did a terrible job at making me feel like I got any value.

wiether 6y ago
You forgot a "k" after 25 I guess ?
- faeyanpiraat 6y ago
  No way! 25k gets you more than 50k clicks, which would require less than a 0.002% conversion rate to produce no results.
faeyanpiraat 6y ago
$25 is a very small amount, you need to experiment more, driving traffic is only one part of the puzzle, you haven't got enough data to confirm which part of your campaign is the bottleneck to conversions.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- seppin 6y ago
  I'm sure Facebook would say the same thing. "You need to give us more money before we give you any value, or signs of value."
sputr 6y ago
You know the concept of "conversion". So, so, so many people don't. Idea of ROI is foreign to them. Facebook is going this whole "be your own advertiser" thing and ... well, it's working. They see the pretty graphs and big number ("You reached 50k people!") and they thing it's fantastic. The idea that the conversion from 50k impressions could be 0% ... does not compute, because they imagine 50k people spending cognitive energy on their ad ... not 50k people scrolling past the ad never even noticing it.
com2kid 6y ago
I spent a few hundred dollars, in $25 increments. I ran different ad copy, different visuals, different times of day. The difference in effectiveness between different visuals and ad copy ranged from "no one clicked this" to "10% conversion after hitting my landing page." For the right audience, with the right campaign, FB ads do work. But you have to play around, and what does work might not be intuitive. Also I found out that the ad copy that worked on FB didn't work on Reddit, and vis versa.
- mtnGoat 6y ago
  $25 is not enough to prove anything. Statistical significance is important.
  - faeyanpiraat 6y ago
    Wouldn't finding a well converting copy and targeting combo throw all the statistical significance issues out the window? I mean you can start experiments with statistically significant results branching from that, but when you are tight on budget, and just want to start out, it might be better to just randomly find something which can get the ball rolling?

wiether 6y ago

You forgot a "k" after 25 I guess ?

faeyanpiraat 6y ago
No way! 25k gets you more than 50k clicks, which would require less than a 0.002% conversion rate to produce no results.

faeyanpiraat 6y ago

$25 is a very small amount, you need to experiment more, driving traffic is only one part of the puzzle, you haven't got enough data to confirm which part of your campaign is the bottleneck to conversions.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
seppin 6y ago
I'm sure Facebook would say the same thing. "You need to give us more money before we give you any value, or signs of value."

sputr 6y ago

You know the concept of "conversion". So, so, so many people don't. Idea of ROI is foreign to them. Facebook is going this whole "be your own advertiser" thing and ... well, it's working. They see the pretty graphs and big number ("You reached 50k people!") and they thing it's fantastic. The idea that the conversion from 50k impressions could be 0% ... does not compute, because they imagine 50k people spending cognitive energy on their ad ... not 50k people scrolling past the ad never even noticing it.

com2kid 6y ago

I spent a few hundred dollars, in $25 increments. I ran different ad copy, different visuals, different times of day. The difference in effectiveness between different visuals and ad copy ranged from "no one clicked this" to "10% conversion after hitting my landing page." For the right audience, with the right campaign, FB ads do work. But you have to play around, and what does work might not be intuitive. Also I found out that the ad copy that worked on FB didn't work on Reddit, and vis versa.

mtnGoat 6y ago
$25 is not enough to prove anything. Statistical significance is important.
- faeyanpiraat 6y ago
  Wouldn't finding a well converting copy and targeting combo throw all the statistical significance issues out the window? I mean you can start experiments with statistically significant results branching from that, but when you are tight on budget, and just want to start out, it might be better to just randomly find something which can get the ball rolling?