Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

signnow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 69 posts

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#31

Post by bane »

kposehn wrote: post #24
bane wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crap, that's terrible performance. We're probably spending $5.00 a day on Google adverts and pulling in about that many clickthroughs. (checking), yup, we had 83 clickthroughs today and a total cost of $4.09. CTR is at about 1.18% (quickly scratches FB off of list of advertising vehicles)

FB and Google CTR is like comparing apples and unicorns :) Typically with FB, you are doing well if you are finding anything near 0.05% CTR. Remember, these are content ads and not paid search. Paid search you should be hitting 5%+ CTR on your top search keywords (in position 1-2, around 3% for #3 and 2% or less for anything below). On FB, getting an ad with a consistent 0.077% CTR means they are on to something and…

With paid search you bid on user intent through keywords - what they are looking for right now. On Facebook you are bidding on people and trying to get their attention, a big difference :)

That's a very important distinction I hadn't really considered. Their method for "targeting" is entirely different.

I wonder which is more effective?

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#32

Post by ssharp »

mcdowall wrote: post #16

So essentially $1100 for ~600 likes, I certainly wouldn't be happy with that return. It's an informative piece but I think your summary is a bit off regarding the campaign a success generally. I think by simply joining Facebook groups in this sector and engaging with the group you could've achieved 600 likes in the same timescale and saved yourself the money.

Is there an industry standard on $/like?

It seems like you can't really judge how much you should spend per like because you haven't yet calculated the revenue and profits per like.

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#33

Post by iworkforthem »

Most would agreed that campaign did not performed, instead aim to achieve CTR > 1% and Bid Facebook ads is used widely by affiliate marketers, you could spend some time on blogs like MrGreen ( http://stackthatmoney.com ), or affiliate marketing news aggregator ( http://affbuzz.com )

I would change the following if my objective is to get more likes & users.

- Target person, i.e vc, developers, etc instead.

- Limit and test the age groups.

- Target Tech events.

Bids will be cheaper & CTR will be more targeted. If it is not CTR, KILL it. Personally I like what you are doing at signnow, much easier to use than those I used when opening up my trading account.

Maybe you want;

- Add the Facebook icon or something to link to your Facebook page in your website.

- I am kinda of surprised that there's no YouTube explaining signnow, considering doing a hipmunk-like video explaining what signnow does.

- If you have existing customers, do a video case study what it does your customers and how signnow could come in handy in other industries or applications, etc.

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#34

Post by ltamake »

jbwyme wrote: post #11
mchusma wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats the follow up article, expect it in the days to come.

But then... THAT will be on HN. Then what?

An indefinite loop of follow-up articles, and every single one will be posted on HN. :D

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#35

Post by ToastOpt »

rickmode wrote: post #30

Regarding the ad the worked best, I couldn't tell what the heck the image was, and I'm curious - the image was interesting. Looks like a spiral of some sort. (I didn't see it as a stack of beer until I looked back after reading what it was.) I suspect the higher click-through rate was more about curiosity about the image.

I have to admit, I've personally clicked through a couple ads for precisely this reason, only to immediately hit the back button upon realizing it was just an ad.

And the next time I see the ad, I do it again.

It may be effective at getting click throughs, but the retention rate likely leaves something to be desired.

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#36

Post by mscarborough »

Silhouette wrote: post #2

Am I missing something here? The author seems pleased with the results, but as an outsider who isn't familiar with his company I see an ad campaign that cost over $1,000, achieved clickthroughs well under 0.1% despite targeting, and does not appear to have resulted in any measurable benefit at all. There are some comments at the end of the article about how Facebook is great for brand awareness, but there doesn't see…

They mentioned the campaign stopped on the last day of the conference.

Why not let it run for an extra week or three? I don't think demoing new software you learned about during a conference is going to really happen by the last day of said conference.

Also if you did not make an impression on attendees enough to merit an @todo item somewhere, Facebook ads seem kind of futile.

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#37

Post by kn0thing »

iworkforthem wrote: post #33

Most would agreed that campaign did not performed, instead aim to achieve CTR > 1% and Bid Facebook ads is used widely by affiliate marketers, you could spend some time on blogs like MrGreen ( http://stackthatmoney.com ), or affiliate marketing news aggregator ( http://affbuzz.com ) I would change the following if my objective is to get more likes & users. - Target person, i.e vc, developers, etc instead. - Limit and…

re: the hipmunk video, Are you talking about a GrumoMedia video? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6teBPUgz4Y8

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#38

Post by dcosson »

Looks like they didn't really get enough traffic to do this (and idk how easy it is to do with FB and google analytics) but it would have been interesting and probably smarter to also measure each ad's effectiveness by how many conversions it led to on their site rather than just click-throughs to the facebook page. With their "most successful" ad they spent ~$500 to have a bunch of 21-year-olds click on a picture of beer that says nothing about what they do - I doubt these people will respond to a future marketing campaign any better than a random set of the population.

In any case, the analysis was interesting enough to make the front page of HN, which I'm betting will bring them a lot more than 139 visits. So well done with that.

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#39

Post by kposehn »

bane wrote: post #31
kposehn wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FB and Google CTR is like comparing apples and unicorns :) Typically with FB, you are doing well if you are finding anything near 0.05% CTR. Remember, these are content ads and not paid search. Paid search you should be hitting 5%+ CTR on your top search keywords (in position 1-2, around 3% for #3 and 2% or less for anything below). On FB, getting an ad with a consistent 0.077% CTR means they are on to something and…

With paid search you bid on user intent through keywords - what they are looking for right now. On Facebook you are bidding on people and trying to get their attention, a big difference :) That's a very important distinction I hadn't really considered. Their method for "targeting" is entirely different. I wonder which is more effective?

Well, each has a particular use and place. Typically, if you're selling widget software, you should start first with paid search by bidding on various widget related exact-match keywords. Go for people that are searching right now for your kind of product or service.

Facebook comes in to play when you know the sort of person you want. Their age, interests, location, education, etc. You can bid on them there and appeal to their situation, needs and interests directly. If you are selling XYZ service for race car drivers, you can appeal to people that love racing cars with an article and lead form telling them how XYZ service is highly essential for their profession.

Different approaches but still profitable. We spend about 40% of our monthly budget on search and 60% on Facebook. FB is very good when trying to generate leads that you eventually turn into sales. Paid search is very good when you want someone to take out their wallet and buy right the hell now, but you also will pay far more for that person.

Re: We Spent $1,138 on Facebook in 6 Days: Numbers and Lessons Learned

#40

Post by orijing »

Silhouette wrote: post #2

Am I missing something here? The author seems pleased with the results, but as an outsider who isn't familiar with his company I see an ad campaign that cost over $1,000, achieved clickthroughs well under 0.1% despite targeting, and does not appear to have resulted in any measurable benefit at all. There are some comments at the end of the article about how Facebook is great for brand awareness, but there doesn't see…

I don't understand why CTR should matter (except as feedback for whether their ads are performing or not) if they're paying per click (CPC)?
Post reply on HN