First paid test: attention is not fandom

The concept is easy to communicate (R01), so we tested it with money. We ran a paid video campaign on Google Ads around Frequent Flyer Food, aimed at Spotify. Campaign dates: [DATE].

What we measured, across the whole campaign (figures as reported, rounded where the source rounds):

• ~268,446 impressions
• ~167,828 TrueView views
• €155.03 spend
• TrueView view rate around 62.52%
• 366 clicks
• 2 measured conversions

As an awareness campaign it was very cheap per view. That is exactly why it taught us the main lesson: cheap attention is not automatically valuable attention.

The TV trap. Connected TV delivered a great deal of cheap watch time but almost no clicks. Mobile delivered far fewer views but nearly all the action. Someone can happily watch an absurd Meat Energy ad on a television; they are unlikely to pick up a remote, open Spotify and follow an unknown act. The funnel asked too much. TV may suit awareness; mobile is far more relevant for winning listeners. [DATA NEEDED: device split figures]

The targeting error was ours. We had chosen niche themes: carnivore diet, steak, BBQ, meat lovers, butchers, animal-based, food satire, rock. In delivery, the broad topic Arts & Entertainment took roughly 95% of the volume, and many niche terms received few or no impressions. So the campaign did not show that carnivore targeting fails; it barely tested it. It showed that when broad and niche targeting compete in a campaign optimised for cheap views, the system picks cheap entertainment inventory. Google did what the objective rewarded. The flaw was in our set-up.

What changes: separate awareness from conversion; treat TV and mobile differently; test niche audiences in isolation; stop broad topics absorbing specialist targeting; do not make a stream the first KPI.