This is the subhead for the blog post
Marketers are always trying to get a leg up on their competition. Sometimes, this comes in the form of one channel having an advantage over another – in one case, a powerful advantage Twitter targeting/reporting has over Facebook allowed us to reduce the CPA by 75%. We’ll explain.
When you use handle/keyword targeting, Twitter provides a CPA by handle/keyword view. Although these aren’t a perfect 1 to 1 correlation (a user could be following 2 handles and convert – which would credit both handles in this view), this does give you some insight on what handle/keywords sway delivery (CPA may be high because one handle/keyword carries most of the delivery), and what handles/keywords have lower CPAs.
This is a huge differentiator from Facebook. Using Facebook, you can lump interests together, but you won’t know how much one interest can sway the performance of the campaign. In a sense, Twitter gives you more visibility into performance by specific targets.
A word of warning: just because a keyword/handle doesn’t do well in a campaign doesn’t mean you should remove it from everything. Parsing out larger handles from your campaigns and setting them in a separate campaign (in some cases, a campaign with just one handle targeted) allows you to control bidding specifically for that handle and tailor creative to that audience.
These were some of the following handles I was using in a general campaign during the discovery period for a new client:
@NASA was driving a lot of volume but at a much higher CPA then some of the other handles (this is just the top 4 of a bunch).
I separated it into its own campaign:
Then I made some very catered creative:
By separating @NASA from the rest of the herd, and by adding unique creative to that new campaign, I managed to reduce CPA by a whopping 75%. Give it a shot, and let me know how it goes in the comments.