Case Study: Industrial Manufacturer

How we cut paid spend 21% and grew revenue 25%.

Published May 2026 · Reporting window: full-year 2024 vs. 2025

How a manufacturer of industrial and commercial equipment went from 4.55x to 7.18x return on ad spend in 12 months — on a smaller budget.

Industrial manufacturer: 2024 vs. 2025

-21.2%

Paid Ad Spend

+24.5%

Revenue from Paid Media

4.55x to 7.18x

Return on Ad Spend

-45.4%

Cost Per Customer

The Client

Our client manufactures and sells industrial and commercial equipment direct and through a dealer network across North America. Deals range from single-unit online orders to multi-unit specifications for large facilities, with an average deal size of approximately $11,000 from paid search leads.

Going into 2025 they needed to grow pipeline on a tighter budget, not a larger one.

The Challenge

Three constraints shaped the work:

  • Efficiency pressure.The prior year ran at a 4.55x return on ad spend with no clean separation between different types of buyers. The spend was working, but not working hard.
  • Reporting blind spots.Paid social was driving leads but getting almost no credit in revenue reporting. Last-click attribution was undercounting the awareness work the channel was actually doing.
  • Slow creative approvals.A gated internal approval process meant new landing pages, ad variants, and offers took weeks to ship instead of days. Paid search and paid social need a faster cycle to stay fresh.

The Approach

The thesis going into 2025 was not “spend more.” It was: segment harder, cut what isn’t converting, and let the channels that do convert do more with less.

1. Rebuilt campaign structure by buyer intent

The 2024 account ran two broad campaigns that mixed every type of buyer into one bucket. In 2025 we rebuilt into separate campaigns by what the buyer was actually looking for: branded searches, product-specific queries tiered by deal size and application, commercial applications, and competitor terms.

Each campaign got cost-per-acquisition targets based on what that deal type is actually worth. Higher-value industrial inquiries could support a higher acquisition cost; smaller commercial orders could not. Running them together meant both were being managed to the wrong number.

2. Built dedicated landing pages for each campaign type

Paid search only works when the landing page matches what the buyer was looking for. We worked with the client to consolidate thin, off-topic content and build product-specific and application-specific pages so paid traffic had dedicated destinations instead of landing on the homepage.

We tested problem-solution framing versus spec-first framing, form placement, and lead offers on the higher-volume campaigns to find what converted best at each deal tier.

3. Repositioned paid social as awareness, not a sales channel

Paid social was being held accountable for closing deals it was never designed to close. We repositioned it as an awareness channel for the full buying committee, with lead offers sized to the length of the sales cycle rather than trying to close on the ad.

Meta spend fell 18% in line with the overall budget reduction. Cost per lead fell 43%. Close rate on paid social leads rose 52%. The channel was not broken. It was being measured the wrong way.

4. Removed the creative bottleneck

None of the above works if new landing pages, ad variants, and offers take weeks to get approved. A key part of 2025 was getting the client’s internal workflow from gated to fast. From Q4 2024 onward the team could test and ship in days rather than weeks. The efficiency gains below are partly downstream of that change.

The Results

Source: HubSpot CRM and ad platform reports (Google Ads, Microsoft Advertising, Meta Ads), full-year 2024 and 2025, pulled April 2026. Revenue is closed-won, paid-influenced, excluding Offline Sources on both years for a comparable baseline.

Full-year results

Metric20242025Change
Paid Ad Spend$369,804$291,583-21.2%
Revenue from Paid Media$1,681,551$2,094,207+24.5%
Leads from Paid Media3,9654,997+26.0%
Deals Closed140202+44.3%
Return on Ad Spend4.55x7.18x+57.9%
Cost Per Lead$93$58-37.4%
Cost Per Customer$2,641$1,443-45.4%

Spend went down across every channel

Channel20242025Change
Google Ads (Search)$191,467$141,062-26.3%
Microsoft Ads (Search)$64,214$56,944-11.3%
Meta Ads (Social)$114,123$93,577-18.0%
Total$369,804$291,583-21.2%

Revenue by source

Source20242025Change
Paid Search$664,231$869,614+30.9%
Paid Social$94,317$125,504+33.1%
Organic Search$16,673$636,710+3,718%
Direct$791,209$423,895-46.4%
Organic Social$10,721$5,488-48.8%
Other$104,400$31,400-69.9%
Referrals$0$1,596n/a
Total (ex-Offline)$1,681,551$2,094,207+24.5%

The Organic Search and Direct lines require context. See Disclosures below before drawing conclusions from them.

Unit economics by channel: Paid Search cost per lead fell from $205 to $146 (-29%). Paid Social cost per lead fell from $129 to $73 (-43%). Paid Search close rate improved from 4.56% to 5.70% (+25%). Paid Social close rate improved from 1.24% to 1.88% (+52%).

What This Looks Like on a CFO's Desk

Return on ad spend is useful but it’s not how finance measures return. Applying the client’s approximate 40% blended gross margin to paid-influenced revenue:

2024: roughly $672,000 in gross profit on $370,000 in paid spend. $1.82 back for every $1 spent.

2025: roughly $838,000 in gross profit on $292,000 in paid spend. $2.87 back for every $1 spent.

A 57.9% improvement in gross-profit return on ad spend, year over year. Same client, same tracking, better account.

Even after stripping revenue down to gross profit, and before any overhead allocation, every $1 of paid spend returned nearly $3 in gross profit in 2025.

What We'll Claim and What We Won't

Overclaiming is how agencies get fired. A few disclosures on the numbers:

  • Paid search and paid social efficiency gains: we’ll claim these.Same account, same client, same tracking, better campaign structure and landing experience. The improvements in return on ad spend, cost per lead, and cost per customer are real and attributable to the work.
  • Organic search revenue growth: reported as observed, not claimed as an SEO win.The +3,718% figure in the revenue table is largely a reclassification event. UTM and attribution improvements moved revenue previously logged as Direct into Organic Search. Direct fell $791,000 to $424,000 in the same period. Blog consolidation and new product pages contributed genuine organic growth, but we are not claiming a 37x SEO lift.
  • Offline sources excluded from both years.Dealer network, trade show leads, and sales-team-entered deals grew independently of paid media and have been removed from both 2024 and 2025 figures to keep the comparison clean.
  • The 2025 numbers are a floor, not a ceiling.Contacts sourced in 2024 had up to 28 months to close by the time data was pulled. Contacts sourced in 2025 had as few as 4 months. Deals still in progress will continue to close into the 2025 cohort. Full working data available on request.
Synthesis Insights gained a deep understanding of our business to ensure that the results we driving were tangible and relatable to our business goals. I highly recommend.
Liz Ingle
Industrial manufacturer

Who Ran the Account

Andre Rosdahl led paid search strategy and account direction. Senior partners ran paid social on Meta and SEO and organic. No account managers. No junior buyers running campaigns from templates. The people who designed the 2025 restructure are the same people in the account every week.

If your account looks like the 2024 column, let's talk.

If you’re running $250,000 or more in paid media, selling industrial or commercial products with a longer sales cycle, and your reports look fine but your sales team isn’t feeling it — we’d be glad to take a look. We pull your account, show you what we’d change, share the math, and if it’s there, we start. If it isn’t, you keep the audit.

Or email Andre directly: [email protected]