CASE STUDY
Cutting Cost Per Lead With Smarter Ad Structure
Client: A Delhi-based D2C brand (name withheld for confidentiality) — a lead-generation-focused business running paid ads on a modest monthly budget.
The Challenge
The brand was running Google Ads and Facebook Ads to generate leads (form fills and calls), but on a budget under ₹50,000/month, every rupee needed to work harder. Their existing setup used broad, loosely structured targeting, which made it hard to tell which audiences and locations were actually worth the spend.
Our Approach: AI-Assisted Campaign Structuring
We used Claude, connected to campaign planning and analysis, to help design a more disciplined ad structure instead of a handful of broad, catch-all groups. The core idea: separate campaigns by intent and location precision, then let real performance data decide where budget went, rather than spreading it evenly and hoping.
Google Ads Setup
Multiple Ad Groups by Intent
Instead of one broad group, keywords were split into themed ad groups (e.g. by service type and buyer intent), each with its own ad copy matched to that specific intent.
Tighter Location Targeting
Targeting was narrowed from broad, state-wide reach down to specific city-level regions where past conversions were concentrated, cutting spend on locations that rarely converted.
Negative Keywords & Conversion Tracking
Negative keywords were added to filter out clearly irrelevant searches, and conversion tracking was set up specifically for form fills and calls, not just clicks.
Facebook Ads Setup
Segmented Audiences
Instead of one broad interest-based audience, campaigns were split into smaller, more specific audience segments matched to the business’s actual customer profile.
Location-Matched Targeting
Location targeting mirrored the Google Ads approach: precise, data-informed regions rather than broad geographic nets.
Lead Form Ads
Native lead form ads were used to reduce friction — fewer steps between seeing the ad and submitting a lead.
The Result
With the budget still under ₹50,000/month, restructured ad groups and tighter location targeting brought the brand’s cost per lead down compared to their previous campaigns, without increasing spend. The gain came from cutting waste (irrelevant clicks, low-converting locations) rather than spending more.
Note: exact figures are withheld along with the client’s name for confidentiality. This case study describes the real approach and directional result, not disclosed metrics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What made the biggest difference in lowering cost per lead?
Splitting one broad ad group into multiple intent-specific groups, combined with narrowing location targeting to areas that actually converted, rather than spending broadly across a whole state or region.
Can this work on a small monthly budget?
Yes — this case study involved a monthly ad budget under ₹50,000. Tighter structure often matters more than a bigger budget, especially at smaller spend levels.
How was Claude actually used in this process?
Claude was used to help plan and structure the ad group segmentation and analyze performance data, supporting the strategy rather than replacing human decision-making on the account.
Do you run both Google Ads and Facebook Ads together, or separately?
Both, run as separate campaigns with platform-specific structures, but coordinated around the same overall lead-generation goal and location strategy.
Can you do this for my business?
Start a project and we’ll review your current ad setup and where restructuring could help.