This really reinforces something I've been thinking about lately: brand isn't the opposite of performance, it amplifies it. I recently came across a perspective from FTA Global that explained how AI search is pushing brands to invest in credibility and long-term visibility, not just short-term attribution. This piece connects well with that idea. Measuring every click matters, but building something people remember matters even more
Exactly. Investing in credibility and long term visibility is the better strategy than chasing short term gains by pushing branded Search from 80% to 90% impression share.
The same applies to demand generation. Brands that invest in building awareness and consideration typically pay less for branded traffic over time because they've already built brand equity. As branded CTR increases, Google rewards that with lower CPCs, making every click more efficient.
This matches what we see auditing retailer accounts constantly: a "Limited by budget" flag gets treated as a green light without checking whether the incremental spend is simply being absorbed by branded Shopping placements. In practice the harder part isn't building the negative-keyword architecture you describe, it's getting finance to accept a lower blended ROAS on the non-brand campaign as the actually healthier number, since brand will always look better on a dashboard than the channels doing the real acquisition work.
Agreed. Once you're spending £100k+/month in a market, MMM is one of the best ways to measure true CPA and ROAS. It also quantifies diminishing returns, which is invaluable when discussing budgets with finance / CFO.
This really reinforces something I've been thinking about lately: brand isn't the opposite of performance, it amplifies it. I recently came across a perspective from FTA Global that explained how AI search is pushing brands to invest in credibility and long-term visibility, not just short-term attribution. This piece connects well with that idea. Measuring every click matters, but building something people remember matters even more
Exactly. Investing in credibility and long term visibility is the better strategy than chasing short term gains by pushing branded Search from 80% to 90% impression share.
The same applies to demand generation. Brands that invest in building awareness and consideration typically pay less for branded traffic over time because they've already built brand equity. As branded CTR increases, Google rewards that with lower CPCs, making every click more efficient.
This matches what we see auditing retailer accounts constantly: a "Limited by budget" flag gets treated as a green light without checking whether the incremental spend is simply being absorbed by branded Shopping placements. In practice the harder part isn't building the negative-keyword architecture you describe, it's getting finance to accept a lower blended ROAS on the non-brand campaign as the actually healthier number, since brand will always look better on a dashboard than the channels doing the real acquisition work.
Agreed. Once you're spending £100k+/month in a market, MMM is one of the best ways to measure true CPA and ROAS. It also quantifies diminishing returns, which is invaluable when discussing budgets with finance / CFO.