Share
Explore

RUGC-PCHCM | Performance Log

Important Dates Starting Google: 15 March 2023 LinkedIn: 27 March 2023 Facebook: 29 March 2023 Price Change: 4th May 2023

End of Run Update

Overall metric:

image.png

Summarizing below the movement in metrics post price revision (i.e. 4 July when marketing was resumed) ​Period: 4 July - 7 Sep ​Leads: 328 ​Apps: 45 ​Paid Apps: 18 ​Spend: $18,955 ​Revenue from incremental PAs: ~ $48K ​CAC since price revision: ~39% ​Geo-Split:
17 off 24 overall enrolments (70%) have come from Texas, US. At the application level, 41/75 are from Texas
5 off 7 enrolments from SEM NonBrand (71%) are from Texas. At the application level 12/20 are from Texas
1 off 1 SEM Brand enrolment is from Texas. At the application level 3/3 are from Texas (this is from IC level report created this year)

25th Aug 2023 Update

Overall metric:

image.png
Between MDR1 and MDR2, we received only 35 leads. This is because of focus on only SEM nonbrand due to the spends overhead (and high CAC). We saw no PAs during this period.
Between MDR2 and MDR3, social was enabled and across channels we generated 137 leads. Over the MDR3 period, we saw a good jump in PAs from 10 to 17.
Paid channel enrolment contribution increased from 62% to 70% between MDR1 and MDR3.
Social - All 3 PAs received are from leads generated post we resumed marketing on 9 Aug. Effectively meaning the channel garnered 3 PAs off 98 leads @53% CAC.
At an overall level, we see that 11 off the 17 PAs have an IC created date after 4 July when the marketing was resumed - meaning we saw no PAs from the older leads post price revision.
Summarizing below the movement in metrics post price revision (i.e. 4 July when marketing was resumed) ​Period: 4 July - 25 Aug ​Leads: 232 ​Apps: 29 ​Paid Apps: 11 ​Spend: $14,677 ​Revenue from incremental PAs: ~ $29K ​CAC since price revision: ~50%

28th July 2023 Update

Overall metric:

image.png

MDR 1 was concluded on 27th July (this is in addition to an MDR in June on the higher price point)
Summarizing below the movement in metrics post price revision (i.e. 4 July when marketing was resumed) ​Period: 4 July - 27 July ​Leads: 61 ​Apps: 8 ​Paid Apps: 2 (3 including 1 withdrawal) ​Spend: $6,496 ​Revenue from incremental PAs: ~ $5,300
*Note - the metrics above reflect the incremental numbers since marketing was resumed on 4 July, and not necessarily the funnel of the said leads.
image.png


14th July 2023 Update

Overall metric: ​
image.png

Marketing was resumed on 4th July post price revision to $2,800 (marketing was paused between 8 June to 3 July to wait for the revised price to go live)
For SEM NonBrand post price revision: - C2L for the Texas campaign dropped significantly to 2.17% (from 5.43%) - C2L for the PAN (Rest of US) campaign improved by 56% (from 4.04% to 6.33%) - The texas targeting has since been clubbed into the PAN US campaign
image.png
The CPLs (for SEM NonBrand) have started to drop by $10-15 post price revision ​
image.png
No rise/fall seen in L2A post price revision yet ​
image.png

31st May 2023 Update

TAM calculation: For the TAM estimation, these are monthly volumes of the main keywords to give you an estimate. Approx ~1/10th
image.png
Overall metric:
Screenshot 2023-05-31 at 10.28.43 AM.png
Previously as on 18th May:
Screenshot 2023-05-18 at 1.55.03 PM.png
Paid App Profiles: ​
image.png
2 PAs one from sem_brand and one from sem_nonbrand. Looking at the IC created date, it is seen that both PAs have been created and enrolled post-price revision.
These converted over the weekends immediately after becoming leads without getting called (A2PA vs CA2PA: 7.7% V 0). Typically should be ~25% for bootcamp
1 PA has no revenue attributed (not sure why)
Non_brand: $2.6K additional spends, CPL reduction from $183 to $175
Social: additional $700 spends . Now it’s paused as no conversions after 11 apps and ~10K spend
Brand CPL improved from 77 to 65 aggregate
LinkedIn remained paused

State Expansion didn’t help much
The search non brand campaign expanded from Texas to nearby states.
We’ve spent $429 and got 2 leads ($214 CPL). Poor C2L at 2.7% (7.9% in Texas) ​
image.png

OR feedback:
• Majority of the learners have highlighted a lack of funds despite the reduction in the fee. • We had 3 interested participants who liked the idea of price reduction and wanted some time to think about it, when we tried to reach out to them, they didn’t answer. • We have tried reaching out to all the learners via Calls/ emails and made 2 additional attempts after the price reduction was rolled out however no one answered.
• We still don’t have an update on the Loan Partners as per Emily’s last email, having a funding partner might help the learners who are struggling to pay using their credit cards
OR metrics
Attempt % / Attempt per IC : 96.4%/3.81 (better than average) Connect %: 35.1% (better than average)

————-

18th May 2023 update

Overall ~ 50 marketing days
Screenshot 2023-05-18 at 1.55.03 PM.png
The program is currently trending at an L2A of 6.4% vs a bootcamp category avg. of 13.5% (Q3+Q4). This could be on account of Rice not being as popular a brand when compared with our other partner universities
Screenshot 2023-05-18 at 6.38.52 PM.png
The program was initially priced at $8,450 - higher than our more established programs. This could be another driving factor for low L2PA. This fee has now been reduced by 30% (current price $5,915)
SEM-Non brand L2A is at 11.63% as this is mostly from Texas
Non-paid have generated only 23 leads and 2 apps. Largely paid in channel mix.

App profiles: 13/18 are from healthcare

Screenshot 2023-05-18 at 4.05.14 PM.png
Post Price Change things improved marginally (early signals)
0
Channel
Cohort
CPC ($)
CTR (%)
C2L (%)
CPL ($)
Leads
App
L2A (%)
CPA ($)
1
Google search Texas
Pre
12.2
5.02
7.02
174
26
1
0.04
4524
2
Post
10.1
5.24
5.46
184
8
1
0.13
1472
3
facebook
Pre
3.05
0.51
7.35
41
128
6
0.05
874
4
Post
2.16
0.63
8.66
24
73
3
0.04
584
There are no rows in this table
On Google, CPCs have decreased but C2Ls have decreased too (could be early days).
On Facebook all funnel metrics have improved.

Google:

Structure: 3 primary campaigns
NonBrand - Texas
NonBrand - RoUS
Brand
Targeted Keywords:NonBrand ​"healthcare management certificate online" "healthcare management certification" [healthcare management] "healthcare management course" "healthcare management degree" "health care management online degree" "master's degree healthcare management"
Brand "rice university healthcare management" "rice healthcare management" “rice professional certificate healthcare management" "glasscock school healthcare administration" "rice university healthcare administration" "glasscock school healthcare management" "rice healthcare administration" "rice healthcare management certificate" ​Ad Previews:Desktop
image.png
image.png
Mobile
image.png
image.png
Performance: ​Non Brand - only performing in Texas
image.png
We see that the program is seeing good traction in ‘Texas’, but not so much in the remainder of the US. This is reflected in both the CTRs and conversion rate for respective campaigns.
Within ‘Texas’, although the leading metrics are doing well, the search volumes are low eventually generating fewer leads per day (avg. 1 lead per day).
Keyword level
Screenshot 2023-05-18 at 4.01.03 PM.png
Observations
- 94% of clicks have come from high-intent keywords containing phrases such as course, certification, degree, or brand keywords
- Search volumes more inclined towards master's / degree programs in healthcare (46% of total clicks)
- Low Lead volumes due to visible traction only in Texas (US)

Search terms - mostly around masters and degree programs
Looking at search term trends from Google, the audience seems to be more inclined towards opting for a masters/degree program in healthcare compared to a certification. Sharing below top search terms where our ad impressions have been triggered: ​
image.png
Brand - Going strong but can’t scale
image.png
The brand campaign has very a very good conversion rate and CPL, but again is limited by its search volume.
image.png

While the CTRs and other leading metrics for brand campaign are in line with Bootcamp programs, search volume is almost negligible leading to low lead generation.
Other Campaigns (Going Broad):In an attempt to scale lead generation from ‘Texas’, we experimented with ‘broad match’ keywords that help extend the potential reach of campaigns. The following keywords were bid upon under broad match: healthcare management certification healthcare management certificate online healthcare management course
image.png
The performance for this campaign was poor compared to the primary campaign (targeting Texas), with a lower conversion rate, and high CPLs.

Largely meeting funnel benchmarks (excl. Texas):
Screenshot 2023-05-18 at 4.07.02 PM.png

- RoUS campaign generated only 2 leads (4%) with 15% of total google spends
-Texas C2L is at ~7.5%. C2L and and CPL is $136. Drop majorly is from ROUS

Facebook:

Campaign Structure: 2 primary campaigns targeting ‘Texas’ and ‘RoUS’ separately. ​Targeting:
image.png
Ad Previews (Top 2 by lead volume): ​
image.png
image.png

Performance (similar between Texas and RoUS):
image.png
See that both Texas and RoUS have a similar performance in terms of leading top-level metrics like CTR, C2L, and L2A (Texas though is comparatively poorer, it could be on account of limiting the campaigns reach to just 1 state). We are yet to see any paid conversions though on a base of ~150 leads.

LinkedIn:

Campaign Structure: 2 primary campaigns targeting ‘Texas’ and ‘RoUS’ separately. ​Targeting: ​
image.png

Ad Previews:
image.png

image.png

Performance (similar between Texas and RoUS):
image.png
Similar to Facebook, we see that RoUS was generating leads at a lower CPL compared to Texas. This again could be due to the limited reach for only Texas. We are yet to see any paid conversions down the funnel. (24 Leads, 1 App) The campaigns have now been merged into one targeting all of US.



Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.
Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (
CtrlP
) instead.