When I set it to "Cost Per Result Goal", its impression is very small. Is it because I set it too low or need to wait for the system to optimize? When you set the "Cost Per Result Goal", what is your setting standard, and how often do you observe and make adjustments?
So putting on a cost per result goal is always going to throttle the ad spend and reach. The lower you set your cost per goal the more it will throttle it. For example on one of our adsets we did this on, the adset budget was $500 a day. So over a 7day period that should be $3500 spend. However with our $3 cost per goal it spent $135 over that 7 day period. If we raised that cost per goal it would give Facebook more license to find us more lead so spend would increase. So its important to test different goals. For us this was fine as we have other adsets pushing volume. this adset was more to chip in with a few cheaper leads to bring the overal CPL down. If you need more volume from your adset with the cost per goal, I'd raise and see how the impressions and leads go.
if you make this change to an exisitng ad set then wont it restart the learning process? Also why not use this when first creating an ad set rather then adding it in later?
You can use it at the start, but you have zero data to go off and so does Facebook. When you start out a campaign you want to give it as little limitations as possible so it has the most chance of success. When you AND Facebook have an idea of a good CPL, with a good ad with history, this can really help with ad fatigue on your best adsets.
Its because the cost per result is set to low for the total allocated budget on the adset. So if you have a 100$ campaign daily budget but the cost per result goal is set at like 5dollars they either wont run or you'll get a couple cents spent here and there.
No, it’s a an extra thing you can do. We use it when a good performing adset starts to fatigue and the CPL starts to rise. This can bring the cost back down.
Since you have spent less money later. Don’t you think this is also a huge factor that Facebook gets you good results when you are spending less and cost per result increases as you scale up the campaigns
This is a type of "Cap". So it will usuallly mean throttling spend. And I think your thought process definitely has some merit, without doubt. The difference with this method, rather than just reducing your budget to lower CPL, is that on some days it will spend $20 and other days it spends $200. The cost per goal action, when used on ads that have a good performance history allows facebook to go hard when leads are cheap and limit spend when traffic is expensive. We only use this method to elongate the time a good performing ad can last before totally fatiging.
Is cost per result when some signs up through my referral link? and wont i pay anything for clicks or impression?
When I set it to "Cost Per Result Goal", its impression is very small. Is it because I set it too low or need to wait for the system to optimize? When you set the "Cost Per Result Goal", what is your setting standard, and how often do you observe and make adjustments?
So putting on a cost per result goal is always going to throttle the ad spend and reach. The lower you set your cost per goal the more it will throttle it.
For example on one of our adsets we did this on, the adset budget was $500 a day.
So over a 7day period that should be $3500 spend. However with our $3 cost per goal it spent $135 over that 7 day period. If we raised that cost per goal it would give Facebook more license to find us more lead so spend would increase.
So its important to test different goals. For us this was fine as we have other adsets pushing volume. this adset was more to chip in with a few cheaper leads to bring the overal CPL down.
If you need more volume from your adset with the cost per goal, I'd raise and see how the impressions and leads go.
What do you do if the good performing ad set fatiging and adding cost per result goal does not help?
Change Creative
Does it work for sales objectives?
How many purchases do you refommened before cost Caps
The magic 50 mark is always a good start. The more you have the better
if you make this change to an exisitng ad set then wont it restart the learning process? Also why not use this when first creating an ad set rather then adding it in later?
You can use it at the start, but you have zero data to go off and so does Facebook. When you start out a campaign you want to give it as little limitations as possible so it has the most chance of success. When you AND Facebook have an idea of a good CPL, with a good ad with history, this can really help with ad fatigue on your best adsets.
my cost per results ads won''t run ....
Its because the cost per result is set to low for the total allocated budget on the adset. So if you have a 100$ campaign daily budget but the cost per result goal is set at like 5dollars they either wont run or you'll get a couple cents spent here and there.
should i need to pay for cost per result in facebook ads?
No, it’s a an extra thing you can do. We use it when a good performing adset starts to fatigue and the CPL starts to rise. This can bring the cost back down.
Bro i am running male enhancement Leads but Leads cost is very high how to solve this isues 🙏
Since you have spent less money later. Don’t you think this is also a huge factor that Facebook gets you good results when you are spending less and cost per result increases as you scale up the campaigns
This is a type of "Cap". So it will usuallly mean throttling spend. And I think your thought process definitely has some merit, without doubt. The difference with this method, rather than just reducing your budget to lower CPL, is that on some days it will spend $20 and other days it spends $200. The cost per goal action, when used on ads that have a good performance history allows facebook to go hard when leads are cheap and limit spend when traffic is expensive.
We only use this method to elongate the time a good performing ad can last before totally fatiging.
@@Flexxable Makes sense. Thanks for the detailed answer
You talk to a rep?
Yeah
ROI over 20 years is negative@@Flexxable