WEBVTT
00:00:02.633 --> 00:00:05.633
Welcome to Let's run Facebook ads with me, Nick Boddington.
00:00:05.849 --> 00:00:08.615
This podcast is your go to for mastering Facebook ads.
00:00:08.615 --> 00:00:11.615
But as you know, success doesn't stop at the ad itself.
00:00:11.632 --> 00:00:17.132
We'll dive into everything from funnels and e-commerce to email marketing, lead generation and more.
00:00:17.582 --> 00:00:22.649
If you're ready to take your skills to the next level, check out my new school platform@school.com.
00:00:22.649 --> 00:00:23.882
The Ads clinic.
00:00:23.882 --> 00:00:32.899
Inside you'll find how to videos and live dropping clinicals where you can ask your Facebook questions and get the answers you need to grow your business.
00:00:32.899 --> 00:00:37.850
And lastly, if you enjoy the podcast, it would mean the world to me if you would subscribe to the channel.
00:00:37.850 --> 00:00:44.149
It's the best way to help the podcast grow and keep bringing you valuable content every week. Let's get on with the podcast.
00:00:45.549 --> 00:00:50.383
been testing a slightly different way of running my Facebook ads for the last two months.
00:00:50.383 --> 00:00:53.865
Instead of constantly creating completely new ads.
00:00:53.865 --> 00:01:06.299
I'm running seven different creative concepts, but inside each one I'm giving meta three, four, sometimes five different iterations of the same creative, using flexible, creative.
00:01:06.450 --> 00:01:13.433
so far across these ads, I've spent around 700 pounds and average cost per result of 6.40 pounds.
00:01:13.465 --> 00:01:15.316
Which is exactly where I need it to be.
00:01:15.316 --> 00:01:18.533
But what's interesting isn't just the 6.40 pounds.
00:01:18.533 --> 00:01:20.615
It's what's happening inside the campaign.
00:01:20.615 --> 00:01:26.700
Some ads are considerably cheaper, some are more expensive, some iterations barely get touched.
00:01:26.700 --> 00:01:29.500
But when you look at the campaign as a whole.
00:01:29.500 --> 00:01:38.650
I think this gives us a really good example of what meta actually means when it keeps telling advertisers it wants creative diversity.
00:01:38.650 --> 00:01:45.832
So this video, I'm going to take you directly into my ads manager and show you exactly how I've structured this.
00:01:45.832 --> 00:01:51.266
Break down the different creatives and show you the results after around two months of testing it.
00:01:51.266 --> 00:02:09.733
If you're new to this channel, I've been running meta ads for over ten years, and on this channel, I tried to cut through a lot of the theory and show you what's actually happening inside real ad accounts, and this particular test has become one of my favorite ways of running ads at the moment, because one of the biggest conversations around meta right now is creative diversity.
00:02:09.733 --> 00:02:14.616
Meta doesn't just want us to give it ten versions of essentially the same advert.
00:02:14.616 --> 00:02:21.665
It wants different concepts, different formats, different messages, different reasons for someone to stop scrolling.
00:02:21.800 --> 00:02:25.082
there's another layer to this, which I think a lot of advertisers are missing.
00:02:25.082 --> 00:02:31.466
once I have those different concepts, I can then give meta multiple iterations within each content.
00:02:31.466 --> 00:02:40.449
rather than seven ads, meaning seven pieces of creative, my seven ads could actually give meta 25 or 30 different creative variations to work with.
00:02:40.682 --> 00:02:42.082
that's what I want to show you.
00:02:42.082 --> 00:02:47.550
So let me take you into the ad account show exactly what I Hey, while I've got you, I just wanted to ask.
00:02:47.582 --> 00:02:51.900
Would you like me to go into your ads manager and actually see what's working?
00:02:52.066 --> 00:02:55.216
Because I bet your ads aren't broken and I bet we can fix something.
00:02:55.216 --> 00:02:58.282
There's a reason our top clients stop guessing and start scaling.
00:02:58.282 --> 00:03:05.550
So if you've got campaigns that are burning cash, or you're having trouble barely even breaking even on them, let's have a look and let's see what we can fix.
00:03:05.550 --> 00:03:09.466
100% no fluff, no sales pitch, just a pro-level ad review.
00:03:09.566 --> 00:03:15.765
So book your 30 minute free Facebook ad review session and walk away with some instant wins.
00:03:15.816 --> 00:03:19.332
Go to the Ads Clinic icon and book your call today.
00:03:19.349 --> 00:03:23.765
Do it now before you forget, but make sure you come back to listen to the rest of the podcast.
00:03:23.765 --> 00:03:25.466
Enjoy! Okay.
00:03:25.466 --> 00:03:34.466
So what you're looking at here is the campaign I've been running for approximately two months, And you can see straight away that I've got these different ads running.
00:03:34.466 --> 00:03:39.733
But the most important thing to understand is that I'm not just running seven random ads.
00:03:39.733 --> 00:03:42.765
Each of these represents a different creative concept.
00:03:42.765 --> 00:03:50.582
For example, I might have a screen share ad, I might have a testimonial, might have a talking head video, I might have something more educational.
00:03:50.582 --> 00:03:55.449
I might have something that's much more direct response and focused on the problem.
00:03:55.449 --> 00:03:57.449
That's the first level of diversity.
00:03:57.449 --> 00:04:01.216
But now let me open one of these up inside this particular ad.
00:04:01.250 --> 00:04:05.349
I've then got multiple versions of essentially the same creative.
00:04:05.349 --> 00:04:08.432
So let's say this is my screen share concept.
00:04:08.432 --> 00:04:14.082
I might have the same core screen share video, but version one starts with one hook.
00:04:14.116 --> 00:04:21.115
Version two starts with a completely different hook, and version three might have a different text overlay.
00:04:21.115 --> 00:04:25.016
Version four might change how quickly we get the actual content.
00:04:25.016 --> 00:04:27.016
The core idea hasn't changed.
00:04:27.016 --> 00:04:33.649
It's still the same concept, I'm giving meta different ways of presenting that concept to the audience.
00:04:33.899 --> 00:04:36.216
now I'm doing the same thing with the other ads.
00:04:36.216 --> 00:04:43.565
If we look at the testimonial ad, for example, again, I don't necessarily need to go out and get five completely different testimonials.
00:04:43.649 --> 00:04:47.899
can get one strong testimonial and create different variations of it.
00:04:47.949 --> 00:04:49.915
One might lead with the result.
00:04:49.915 --> 00:04:51.800
One might lead with the customer's problem.
00:04:51.800 --> 00:04:54.449
One might have the testimonial on the screen immediately.
00:04:54.449 --> 00:04:57.882
Another might have me introducing the testimonial before we show it.
00:04:57.882 --> 00:05:01.199
Same underlying asset, different executions.
00:05:01.199 --> 00:05:09.500
And suddenly one creative idea has become 4 or 5 different opportunities for meta to find the right person for that particular version.
00:05:09.500 --> 00:05:12.533
Now let's come back out and look at the actual numbers.
00:05:12.533 --> 00:05:17.432
So across these ads, we've spent approximately 1,700 pounds.
00:05:17.550 --> 00:05:21.632
our average cost per result across the campaign is 6.40 pounds.
00:05:21.665 --> 00:05:26.350
Now look at the individual ads because this is where I think it gets interesting.
00:05:26.449 --> 00:05:31.983
They're not all getting 6.40 pounds I've got some ads coming in considerably cheaper than that.
00:05:31.983 --> 00:05:38.983
I've got other ads that are more expensive, and naturally Metta is putting more spend behind certain ads and certain creatives than others.
00:05:39.100 --> 00:05:46.449
I don't necessarily see that as a problem, because I think one of the mistakes we make as advertiser expecting every ad to be a winner.
00:05:46.449 --> 00:05:48.833
That's not how I look at this campaign.
00:05:48.833 --> 00:05:51.365
I'm looking at the ecosystem of the campaign.
00:05:51.365 --> 00:05:54.050
Think about the way somebody actually buys.
00:05:54.050 --> 00:05:57.850
Not everybody sees one advert, clicks it and immediately converts.
00:05:57.899 --> 00:06:03.132
Somebody might see one of the educational videos and then they see a screen share.
00:06:03.132 --> 00:06:05.850
A few days later they say testimonial.
00:06:05.850 --> 00:06:12.716
Then maybe they see a much more direct advert talking about the problem they're currently experiencing.
00:06:12.716 --> 00:06:21.615
Those ads are doing different jobs, and that's why simply looking at every individual ad and saying, this one has a 5 pounds cost per result.
00:06:21.615 --> 00:06:22.516
So it's good.
00:06:22.516 --> 00:06:24.766
This one's 12 pounds, so it's bad.
00:06:24.766 --> 00:06:28.399
Can sometimes give you a completely wrong picture.
00:06:28.500 --> 00:06:35.266
Because meta is looking at all of these signals and all of these different opportunities to reach people through that journey.
00:06:35.266 --> 00:06:38.865
What I care about is what is the overall campaign producing.
00:06:38.865 --> 00:06:42.083
And right now that's 6 pounds, 40 per result.
00:06:42.083 --> 00:06:48.783
There's another benefit I've noticed from doing this frequency, because think about the amount of creative meta now has available.
00:06:48.865 --> 00:06:58.632
I've got around seven core ads, But each one has 3 to 5 different iterations inside Meta doesn't really have seven pieces of creative to choose from.
00:06:58.665 --> 00:07:02.600
It's potentially has 2030 plus variations.
00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:07.399
That gives the algorithm far more opportunities to show somebody something different.
00:07:07.399 --> 00:07:14.632
And it means I'm not hammering the same audience with exactly the same video hook or opening frame again and again.
00:07:14.632 --> 00:07:20.565
This is particularly important when you're working with smaller audiences, or when a campaign has been running for several weeks.
00:07:20.565 --> 00:07:27.315
Instead of immediately thinking, my campaign is increasing, I need to turn everything off and create another ten ads.
00:07:27.315 --> 00:07:35.000
I've effectively built that variation into the campaign from the beginning, but there is one thing I want to make really, really clear.
00:07:35.000 --> 00:07:39.932
I'm not saying take one advert and make 30 tiny variations of it.
00:07:39.932 --> 00:07:41.682
That's not creative diversity.
00:07:41.682 --> 00:07:50.115
If I've got a talking head video and I change the first sentence 20 times, I haven't suddenly created 20 completely different concepts.
00:07:50.115 --> 00:07:57.449
The structure I'm using is different concepts at the ad level, and then different iterations within each concept.
00:07:57.449 --> 00:07:59.216
That's the important distinction.
00:07:59.216 --> 00:08:02.699
So I want the screen share, I want the testimonial.
00:08:02.699 --> 00:08:09.615
I want the educational ad, I want the problem led ad, I want the direct response ad, I want different angles and formats.
00:08:09.649 --> 00:08:16.050
Then inside those concepts, I want meta to have multiple iterations to choose from.
00:08:16.050 --> 00:08:20.065
That's how I'm trying to give the algorithm both breadth and depth.
00:08:20.065 --> 00:08:27.033
And after running this for around two months, I think this is getting much closer to the direction meta wants advertiser to go.
00:08:27.083 --> 00:08:28.949
We're given the algorithm options.
00:08:28.949 --> 00:08:33.883
We're not trying to manually decide which person should see which advert.
00:08:33.883 --> 00:08:42.700
we're creating a genuinely diverse pool of creative and then allowing meta to make those decisions based on the signals it has about the individual user.
00:08:42.700 --> 00:08:44.932
And yes, there will be losers.
00:08:44.932 --> 00:08:46.166
There should be.
00:08:46.166 --> 00:08:53.232
If every single creator of your launching is getting exactly the same result, you're probably not testing enough difference between them, right?
00:08:53.232 --> 00:09:04.832
What matters is whether those creatives collectively produce the result you need in this account after around 1700 and spend that number is currently 6.40 pounds per result.
00:09:04.865 --> 00:09:08.450
So I'm happy to allow meta to decide where the outspend goes.
00:09:08.549 --> 00:09:15.649
if you take one thing away from this video, it's this stop thinking about creative diversity as simply I need more ads.
00:09:15.649 --> 00:09:17.916
Think about it in two layers.
00:09:17.916 --> 00:09:22.816
First, how many genuinely different creative concepts am I giving meta.
00:09:22.816 --> 00:09:27.600
And second, how many different ways can I execute each of those concepts?
00:09:27.600 --> 00:09:43.883
Because seven ads doesn't necessarily mean seven creatives, seven strong concepts, each with 3 to 5 intelligently created iterations, can give measure a huge amount of creative to work with without you having to reinvent your entire advertising strategy every week.
00:09:43.883 --> 00:09:50.049
And based on what I'm seeing, this account over the last two months a structure I'm going to continue testing for sure.
00:09:50.049 --> 00:09:59.582
If you want to see more videos like this where I'm actually talking to you inside live ad accounts showing you what I'm testing, what's working, and more importantly, what's not working.
00:09:59.582 --> 00:10:14.350
Make sure you subscribe to this channel and if you really matter as yourself, have a look at the account after you watching this, ask yourself, do I generally have creative diversity or do I just have lots of ads because they're not necessarily the same thing I'll see in the next video.
00:10:16.600 --> 00:10:18.115
Thank you for joining us again today.
00:10:18.115 --> 00:10:20.049
please feel free to drop us a message.
00:10:20.049 --> 00:10:23.716
We'd love to hear from you and any questions that you would like answered.
00:10:23.716 --> 00:10:27.283
We can do that here on the podcast. You.
00:00:02.633 --> 00:00:05.633
Welcome to Let's run Facebook ads with me, Nick Boddington.
00:00:05.849 --> 00:00:08.615
This podcast is your go to for mastering Facebook ads.
00:00:08.615 --> 00:00:11.615
But as you know, success doesn't stop at the ad itself.
00:00:11.632 --> 00:00:17.132
We'll dive into everything from funnels and e-commerce to email marketing, lead generation and more.
00:00:17.582 --> 00:00:22.649
If you're ready to take your skills to the next level, check out my new school platform@school.com.
00:00:22.649 --> 00:00:23.882
The Ads clinic.
00:00:23.882 --> 00:00:32.899
Inside you'll find how to videos and live dropping clinicals where you can ask your Facebook questions and get the answers you need to grow your business.
00:00:32.899 --> 00:00:37.850
And lastly, if you enjoy the podcast, it would mean the world to me if you would subscribe to the channel.
00:00:37.850 --> 00:00:44.149
It's the best way to help the podcast grow and keep bringing you valuable content every week. Let's get on with the podcast.
00:00:45.549 --> 00:00:50.383
been testing a slightly different way of running my Facebook ads for the last two months.
00:00:50.383 --> 00:00:53.865
Instead of constantly creating completely new ads.
00:00:53.865 --> 00:01:06.299
I'm running seven different creative concepts, but inside each one I'm giving meta three, four, sometimes five different iterations of the same creative, using flexible, creative.
00:01:06.450 --> 00:01:13.433
so far across these ads, I've spent around 700 pounds and average cost per result of 6.40 pounds.
00:01:13.465 --> 00:01:15.316
Which is exactly where I need it to be.
00:01:15.316 --> 00:01:18.533
But what's interesting isn't just the 6.40 pounds.
00:01:18.533 --> 00:01:20.615
It's what's happening inside the campaign.
00:01:20.615 --> 00:01:26.700
Some ads are considerably cheaper, some are more expensive, some iterations barely get touched.
00:01:26.700 --> 00:01:29.500
But when you look at the campaign as a whole.
00:01:29.500 --> 00:01:38.650
I think this gives us a really good example of what meta actually means when it keeps telling advertisers it wants creative diversity.
00:01:38.650 --> 00:01:45.832
So this video, I'm going to take you directly into my ads manager and show you exactly how I've structured this.
00:01:45.832 --> 00:01:51.266
Break down the different creatives and show you the results after around two months of testing it.
00:01:51.266 --> 00:02:09.733
If you're new to this channel, I've been running meta ads for over ten years, and on this channel, I tried to cut through a lot of the theory and show you what's actually happening inside real ad accounts, and this particular test has become one of my favorite ways of running ads at the moment, because one of the biggest conversations around meta right now is creative diversity.
00:02:09.733 --> 00:02:14.616
Meta doesn't just want us to give it ten versions of essentially the same advert.
00:02:14.616 --> 00:02:21.665
It wants different concepts, different formats, different messages, different reasons for someone to stop scrolling.
00:02:21.800 --> 00:02:25.082
there's another layer to this, which I think a lot of advertisers are missing.
00:02:25.082 --> 00:02:31.466
once I have those different concepts, I can then give meta multiple iterations within each content.
00:02:31.466 --> 00:02:40.449
rather than seven ads, meaning seven pieces of creative, my seven ads could actually give meta 25 or 30 different creative variations to work with.
00:02:40.682 --> 00:02:42.082
that's what I want to show you.
00:02:42.082 --> 00:02:47.550
So let me take you into the ad account show exactly what I Hey, while I've got you, I just wanted to ask.
00:02:47.582 --> 00:02:51.900
Would you like me to go into your ads manager and actually see what's working?
00:02:52.066 --> 00:02:55.216
Because I bet your ads aren't broken and I bet we can fix something.
00:02:55.216 --> 00:02:58.282
There's a reason our top clients stop guessing and start scaling.
00:02:58.282 --> 00:03:05.550
So if you've got campaigns that are burning cash, or you're having trouble barely even breaking even on them, let's have a look and let's see what we can fix.
00:03:05.550 --> 00:03:09.466
100% no fluff, no sales pitch, just a pro-level ad review.
00:03:09.566 --> 00:03:15.765
So book your 30 minute free Facebook ad review session and walk away with some instant wins.
00:03:15.816 --> 00:03:19.332
Go to the Ads Clinic icon and book your call today.
00:03:19.349 --> 00:03:23.765
Do it now before you forget, but make sure you come back to listen to the rest of the podcast.
00:03:23.765 --> 00:03:25.466
Enjoy! Okay.
00:03:25.466 --> 00:03:34.466
So what you're looking at here is the campaign I've been running for approximately two months, And you can see straight away that I've got these different ads running.
00:03:34.466 --> 00:03:39.733
But the most important thing to understand is that I'm not just running seven random ads.
00:03:39.733 --> 00:03:42.765
Each of these represents a different creative concept.
00:03:42.765 --> 00:03:50.582
For example, I might have a screen share ad, I might have a testimonial, might have a talking head video, I might have something more educational.
00:03:50.582 --> 00:03:55.449
I might have something that's much more direct response and focused on the problem.
00:03:55.449 --> 00:03:57.449
That's the first level of diversity.
00:03:57.449 --> 00:04:01.216
But now let me open one of these up inside this particular ad.
00:04:01.250 --> 00:04:05.349
I've then got multiple versions of essentially the same creative.
00:04:05.349 --> 00:04:08.432
So let's say this is my screen share concept.
00:04:08.432 --> 00:04:14.082
I might have the same core screen share video, but version one starts with one hook.
00:04:14.116 --> 00:04:21.115
Version two starts with a completely different hook, and version three might have a different text overlay.
00:04:21.115 --> 00:04:25.016
Version four might change how quickly we get the actual content.
00:04:25.016 --> 00:04:27.016
The core idea hasn't changed.
00:04:27.016 --> 00:04:33.649
It's still the same concept, I'm giving meta different ways of presenting that concept to the audience.
00:04:33.899 --> 00:04:36.216
now I'm doing the same thing with the other ads.
00:04:36.216 --> 00:04:43.565
If we look at the testimonial ad, for example, again, I don't necessarily need to go out and get five completely different testimonials.
00:04:43.649 --> 00:04:47.899
can get one strong testimonial and create different variations of it.
00:04:47.949 --> 00:04:49.915
One might lead with the result.
00:04:49.915 --> 00:04:51.800
One might lead with the customer's problem.
00:04:51.800 --> 00:04:54.449
One might have the testimonial on the screen immediately.
00:04:54.449 --> 00:04:57.882
Another might have me introducing the testimonial before we show it.
00:04:57.882 --> 00:05:01.199
Same underlying asset, different executions.
00:05:01.199 --> 00:05:09.500
And suddenly one creative idea has become 4 or 5 different opportunities for meta to find the right person for that particular version.
00:05:09.500 --> 00:05:12.533
Now let's come back out and look at the actual numbers.
00:05:12.533 --> 00:05:17.432
So across these ads, we've spent approximately 1,700 pounds.
00:05:17.550 --> 00:05:21.632
our average cost per result across the campaign is 6.40 pounds.
00:05:21.665 --> 00:05:26.350
Now look at the individual ads because this is where I think it gets interesting.
00:05:26.449 --> 00:05:31.983
They're not all getting 6.40 pounds I've got some ads coming in considerably cheaper than that.
00:05:31.983 --> 00:05:38.983
I've got other ads that are more expensive, and naturally Metta is putting more spend behind certain ads and certain creatives than others.
00:05:39.100 --> 00:05:46.449
I don't necessarily see that as a problem, because I think one of the mistakes we make as advertiser expecting every ad to be a winner.
00:05:46.449 --> 00:05:48.833
That's not how I look at this campaign.
00:05:48.833 --> 00:05:51.365
I'm looking at the ecosystem of the campaign.
00:05:51.365 --> 00:05:54.050
Think about the way somebody actually buys.
00:05:54.050 --> 00:05:57.850
Not everybody sees one advert, clicks it and immediately converts.
00:05:57.899 --> 00:06:03.132
Somebody might see one of the educational videos and then they see a screen share.
00:06:03.132 --> 00:06:05.850
A few days later they say testimonial.
00:06:05.850 --> 00:06:12.716
Then maybe they see a much more direct advert talking about the problem they're currently experiencing.
00:06:12.716 --> 00:06:21.615
Those ads are doing different jobs, and that's why simply looking at every individual ad and saying, this one has a 5 pounds cost per result.
00:06:21.615 --> 00:06:22.516
So it's good.
00:06:22.516 --> 00:06:24.766
This one's 12 pounds, so it's bad.
00:06:24.766 --> 00:06:28.399
Can sometimes give you a completely wrong picture.
00:06:28.500 --> 00:06:35.266
Because meta is looking at all of these signals and all of these different opportunities to reach people through that journey.
00:06:35.266 --> 00:06:38.865
What I care about is what is the overall campaign producing.
00:06:38.865 --> 00:06:42.083
And right now that's 6 pounds, 40 per result.
00:06:42.083 --> 00:06:48.783
There's another benefit I've noticed from doing this frequency, because think about the amount of creative meta now has available.
00:06:48.865 --> 00:06:58.632
I've got around seven core ads, But each one has 3 to 5 different iterations inside Meta doesn't really have seven pieces of creative to choose from.
00:06:58.665 --> 00:07:02.600
It's potentially has 2030 plus variations.
00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:07.399
That gives the algorithm far more opportunities to show somebody something different.
00:07:07.399 --> 00:07:14.632
And it means I'm not hammering the same audience with exactly the same video hook or opening frame again and again.
00:07:14.632 --> 00:07:20.565
This is particularly important when you're working with smaller audiences, or when a campaign has been running for several weeks.
00:07:20.565 --> 00:07:27.315
Instead of immediately thinking, my campaign is increasing, I need to turn everything off and create another ten ads.
00:07:27.315 --> 00:07:35.000
I've effectively built that variation into the campaign from the beginning, but there is one thing I want to make really, really clear.
00:07:35.000 --> 00:07:39.932
I'm not saying take one advert and make 30 tiny variations of it.
00:07:39.932 --> 00:07:41.682
That's not creative diversity.
00:07:41.682 --> 00:07:50.115
If I've got a talking head video and I change the first sentence 20 times, I haven't suddenly created 20 completely different concepts.
00:07:50.115 --> 00:07:57.449
The structure I'm using is different concepts at the ad level, and then different iterations within each concept.
00:07:57.449 --> 00:07:59.216
That's the important distinction.
00:07:59.216 --> 00:08:02.699
So I want the screen share, I want the testimonial.
00:08:02.699 --> 00:08:09.615
I want the educational ad, I want the problem led ad, I want the direct response ad, I want different angles and formats.
00:08:09.649 --> 00:08:16.050
Then inside those concepts, I want meta to have multiple iterations to choose from.
00:08:16.050 --> 00:08:20.065
That's how I'm trying to give the algorithm both breadth and depth.
00:08:20.065 --> 00:08:27.033
And after running this for around two months, I think this is getting much closer to the direction meta wants advertiser to go.
00:08:27.083 --> 00:08:28.949
We're given the algorithm options.
00:08:28.949 --> 00:08:33.883
We're not trying to manually decide which person should see which advert.
00:08:33.883 --> 00:08:42.700
we're creating a genuinely diverse pool of creative and then allowing meta to make those decisions based on the signals it has about the individual user.
00:08:42.700 --> 00:08:44.932
And yes, there will be losers.
00:08:44.932 --> 00:08:46.166
There should be.
00:08:46.166 --> 00:08:53.232
If every single creator of your launching is getting exactly the same result, you're probably not testing enough difference between them, right?
00:08:53.232 --> 00:09:04.832
What matters is whether those creatives collectively produce the result you need in this account after around 1700 and spend that number is currently 6.40 pounds per result.
00:09:04.865 --> 00:09:08.450
So I'm happy to allow meta to decide where the outspend goes.
00:09:08.549 --> 00:09:15.649
if you take one thing away from this video, it's this stop thinking about creative diversity as simply I need more ads.
00:09:15.649 --> 00:09:17.916
Think about it in two layers.
00:09:17.916 --> 00:09:22.816
First, how many genuinely different creative concepts am I giving meta.
00:09:22.816 --> 00:09:27.600
And second, how many different ways can I execute each of those concepts?
00:09:27.600 --> 00:09:43.883
Because seven ads doesn't necessarily mean seven creatives, seven strong concepts, each with 3 to 5 intelligently created iterations, can give measure a huge amount of creative to work with without you having to reinvent your entire advertising strategy every week.
00:09:43.883 --> 00:09:50.049
And based on what I'm seeing, this account over the last two months a structure I'm going to continue testing for sure.
00:09:50.049 --> 00:09:59.582
If you want to see more videos like this where I'm actually talking to you inside live ad accounts showing you what I'm testing, what's working, and more importantly, what's not working.
00:09:59.582 --> 00:10:14.350
Make sure you subscribe to this channel and if you really matter as yourself, have a look at the account after you watching this, ask yourself, do I generally have creative diversity or do I just have lots of ads because they're not necessarily the same thing I'll see in the next video.
00:10:16.600 --> 00:10:18.115
Thank you for joining us again today.
00:10:18.115 --> 00:10:20.049
please feel free to drop us a message.
00:10:20.049 --> 00:10:23.716
We'd love to hear from you and any questions that you would like answered.
00:10:23.716 --> 00:10:27.283
We can do that here on the podcast. You.
