Many marketers mistakenly assume performance marketing channels scale linearly. Co-founder Andy Lambert learned that simply increasing the budget doesn't produce proportional results. Instead, efficiency breaks down, and customer acquisition costs rise, highlighting an over-fixation on demand capture versus sustainable demand creation.
Related Insights
By measuring success on 'last lead source,' the company was incentivized to pour money into paid search for product trials—a clear final touchpoint. This model blinded them to the higher value of other lead types and actively discouraged investment in demand creation activities that build brand and generate higher-quality leads.
ROAS (Return on Ad Spend) is a vanity metric that can mask unprofitable customer acquisition. By focusing on POAS (Profit on Ad Spend), brands are forced to measure the actual profit generated from advertising, linking marketing directly to bottom-line health and avoiding the trap of 'growing broke'.
A low Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) might seem successful, but it could be hiding inefficient creative. Optimizing creative strategy could dramatically lower CAC further (e.g., from $39 to $16), unlocking greater profitability and scale, especially as you increase ad spend.
Focusing on a low Cost Per Lead is a common mistake; cheap leads often fail to convert. The more meaningful metric is Customer Acquisition Cost—total marketing spend divided by actual new customers. This shifts focus from lead volume to profitable growth and true campaign effectiveness.
Many marketers are obsessed with customer acquisition cost. Digitas CEO Amy Lanzi emphasizes the 80/20 rule: 80% of sales come from 20% of existing customers. Aggressive acquisition tactics can alienate this loyal core, so a balanced "recruit and retain" strategy is essential for sustainable growth.
Effective demand generation is a barbell, requiring strong top-of-funnel brand investment to create awareness and great bottom-of-funnel product marketing to convert interest. Viewing performance marketing as a standalone function and funding it in isolation is like "throwing money at a problem but not solving it."
Relying solely on short-term performance marketing becomes unsustainable. Brand investment acts as the fuel for these channels; cutting it means you must spend progressively more just to maintain the same results, leading to a negative spiral.
Data reveals a 'doom loop' of diminishing returns for companies over-relying on performance marketing. Brand investment acts as a multiplier, improving conversion and efficiency. Campaigns that combine brand and performance see a 90% higher ROI, while performance marketing for a weak brand yields a negative 40% ROI.
When ad performance breaks at scale, the problem isn't your bidding strategy; it's that you've saturated the 3% of the market ready to buy now. To grow, you must target the other 97% with broader, less direct hooks and lead magnets that educate them first.
Pouring marketing resources into a "leaky bucket" is inefficient. If customer onboarding is flawed, prioritize fixing it before optimizing top-of-funnel campaigns. The highest leverage is in ensuring activated users convert, not in acquiring more users who will quickly churn.
