Cost per lead is relevant. Cost per click is irrelevant.
Jun 23, 2009 | In Search Optics
If you want clicks, I can get you clicks – just say the word. I know a guy who knows a guy. Leads, not clicks, should be the focal point of your monthly reporting since leads are more relevant than clicks. It’s easy to adjust your PPC campaign to bid on broader keywords which will result in more clicks. Would you rather have 1 click from a local user on the keyword, “Honda service san diego” or 10 clicks from national users on the keyword “Honda”? That’s a no-brainer, assuming you’re a Honda dealership in San Diego of course.
Another reason cost per lead is more relevant is because you can compare it to other marketing methods. You’ll find cost per lead for online marketing is far less expensive than TV or radio; as you probably surmised. TV & radio are extremely expensive compared to online marketing. How many people viewed your commercial is less relevant than if it was viewed by the right audience and how many leads it generated.
Do you know for a fact that the commercial you ran generated 5…10…50 leads? Would you rather have 1 warm lead looking for a specific car or 10 cold, shot-in-the-dark leads who aren’t interested in your services at all?
I promise that you wont receive any award at the end of the month for most clicks. It would be rather impressive if your PPC campaign brought in more leads, which result in sales. A famous saying here at Search Optics is that you “can’t close a click.” Meaning that a click is not worth nearly as much as a lead.
I have a client that ask me THE COST PER LEAD PER LOCATION. I am in the outdoor advertising, and i don’t know what to answer. Any help please.Thank you