We could talk about frequency capping if you want. Maybe that'd be a good topic to cover. Ooh, not for me. I don't use frequency capping at all. Okay. Nevermind. Well, actually that might be a good topic for conversation, Caden. My theory in frequency capping is, The automated bidding strategy does that for me, in my opinion maximize conversions is what I like to use the most. And I usually like to use a daily ad spend in order to control overspend and underspend based on results that I see both in Google Ads and outside Google Ads, whether it's analytics or whether it's npy, whatever it may be. My thought process there is that. Just a level of remarketing ad spend. But I leave frequency captain running wide open. Because there's been a lot of use cases that I've heard, and they're anecdotal, but I forgot about this person that I think it was like Googler, Facebook, whatever. They're like, I just kept seeing their ass, the internet, and they finally wore me down and I bought one. I don't even know why I bought one. I just kept seeing them. I think there is a, use case for that, but I also think that there is some channels that you can sort of use that may be better than Google. I don't like Google remarketing on display. I really don't. I know it works, but I find. More engagement on the YouTube remarketing channel. And that's actually what I'll be talking about too, is I know uh, Osama, you had a, question about YouTube and how you measured that, so we're gonna get to that as well today. But for remarketing, I think YouTube remarketing gives me a better result that I can measure, even if they're not in nor Beam. I'll go to a client. That makes a use case for YouTube remarketing. But Caden, do you have any kind of before or after what your thoughts are on setting frequency caps for display or YouTube or whatever it is? For remarketing? I guess the point there was just to try to leverage more on like the email marketing side and only use it as sort of like a slow burn where you have like, you see one add a day kind of thing, so you keep the spend low and then. Go from there versus like pumping out a bunch of ads based on the conversion data that you would get and then getting a conversion. But in reality, you could have gotten it from like another channel potentially. That was kind of my original, like, thought behind it. One of my questions I have of frequency capping is Google measures an impression, differently impression a viewable impression are two different things to Google. I wonder how that translates Into actual metrics. for example viewable impression versus impression if you have a frequency cap, I thought that went off impression. And if so, there's could be some times where you're showing up at the bottom of the page on cnn.com and people aren't seeing it, but you got an impression. It wasn't a viewable impression, it was an impression. So that'd be something for us to actually look at too, is is there a viewable impression? What's the difference? Strain impression and viewable impression now that's visible for more than three seconds. In the person's view, in the window that they're viewing, viewable is visible for more than three seconds. Got it. And it doesn't have the different types of impressions available in the settings for impression caps. Yeah. It's almost like on YouTube when it's like, Hey, you got 17,000 impress. now the people that watched it for longer than five seconds, so those are 5,000. a person watches 30 seconds or video if their duration is shorter, the 30 seconds or interacts with your video eligible interactions, they measure by 10 seconds. So what I'm wondering is, How much of that, when you do a frequency cap is like, Hey, we're gonna show it to one person, even if they didn't have a viewable impression. I don't know. it's a good kind of good question to ask. I don't know what that is. I have no idea. But to find that out. Here's what I'd like about the remarketing aspect though. In display remarketing, I find that with the loss of being able to target specific audiences, Or when the audiences are just not matched or not used very well. Like we have a one client that is predominantly women and we have a product that is a hair regrowth serum made for women, and 90% of our conversions are coming from the men audience. Client got upset so we had a conversation with 'em. I didn't, it was a member of our team and said, Hey, do you want to target the people that you believe you want to target and cut out 90% of the conversions, or do you wanna just keep it still? I think the client chose does just keep going with it because the audiences are getting a little bit more lackluster in the future. When we look at the audience targeting and, expansion opportunities and, audiences that are not in the segments that you've defined and all the ways that Google is just gonna spend your money without you even knowing. The one reason why I do like YouTube is I can measure not only An impression, but I also can see the view, the view rate, the click the rate, and then the conversions that happened here, which is the ad event type. So I think I get more data from a YouTube remarketing campaign than I would with a. Display campaign because display can count view through conversions. It just never does. I don't know why It's like, Hey, you got 12 sales, but your view through is like 15. For some reason, Google has done a poor job, I view through conversions, but if you look here, for example, the YouTube remarketing, I have three click convers. And 50 engaged view conversions, I'm scaling this up with just standard chopping campaigns. You'll notice that my splits though are 20 grand in cost on standard chopping, and $600 in cost in video remarketing. Very, very, very skewed heavily towards non-brand cold traffic. And then the YouTube shorts is also. Cold traffic audience. This, I'm not worried about attribution here because YouTube does a poor job at attribution. My remarketing, I should have more frequent conversions because those frequent conversions are of a very warm audience that's naturally going to get more conversion with a warm audience than a cold audience. And when you say, Hey, I've spent 600 and made 4,000. Yes. Where did they come? this is a remarketing audience that's gonna be more important than, can I scale this? Not really. I mean, you can, increase your ad spending. Google can show the ads more often to people who are going to buy. Does that mean that people are going to buy more often? Maybe. Where's your point of diminishing returns Much lower of a ceiling than the cold traffic that we're. So when we're looking at YouTube remarketing, I know my view rate, I wanna be above 22%. If it's tracked properly and it's doing well, my cost per review is 12 cents. My cost per click. On display, we're probably looking at about 50 cents to a dollar, just depending upon the industry. My cost per click on YouTube remarketing $6. It's expensive. I'm getting good view rates, but people are not engaging with these ads that much from a click perspective. So my cost per click's high. That's okay. What I'm looking at is am I getting enough views the people that are seeing those ads, are they buying, this is my insurance policy here, this is my insurance. This is simply just a additional metric used as a failsafe. If I get. Interested user and through standard shopping, which means they typed in a non-branded search. They saw my product, they saw how much it was and the title that they saw in the title was relevant enough for them to say, that's a reasonable price of a product I'm looking for. And they clicked on it and they went to the website. We know that people are going to either continually search or come back to the brand or go back to the site directly and buy. When I was showing people display ads, it didn't really change much whether I had dynamic marketing on or not. I didn't really see a measurable result outside the normal ebb and flow of Google. And since I can't earn a view through conversion, I had no way of truly measuring it. Is this even hitting the right audience that ends up converting? I had no. people that were clicking on it from really odd places, absent kids games and all the other stuff, or just, out of non-English speaking websites. Even though I had English as my default browser, I mean, things just weren't matching up. It was so fatty that I just couldn't identify click attri conversions no matter the attribution bottle that I was using or even nor Beam. My dynamic or marketing from a click perspective was always a higher c p A than my new customer acquisition. From shopping, even when I'm looking at first click attributed to last click, that's what's interesting is I know it does well, but if I can't take a remarketing campaign and increase its ad spend and see more first time customers, that's my line of demarcation cuz that's all we're measuring. If I can't increase my ad spend and also see an increase in new customer, That's your point of diminishing returns. We are starting to over remarket or you're going after a user who is uninterested and you're begging that's gonna be expensive. Because if you think about begging a person to come back when they're no longer interested is gonna cost a specific dollar amount. What is that dollar amount to beg to bring a person back? This is how much things cost. I'm just gonna use round numbers. It's $6 to bring a person back to the site. Physically in this campaign, it's $2 to bring a new interested person that said, now, yes, I'm interested in this product. I wanna learn more. So it's three times more expensive to bring that person. From a click perspective. So if my conversion rate, when all things are said and done of each channel's click is going to dictate what the CPA is going to be and is also going to dictate the conversion cost and CAC cost. If I spend six, let's just say I spend $8 for me, that $8 at $2 a click is gonna bring me four new interested people who are, hot ready. Or I can bring one person back to the site through a remarking campaign. Yes, there is good visual representation of our products that are being shown to people who have purchased or who are being shown to people who are going to purchase here. This is good. This is not an indicator at how good this YouTube remarketing campaign's. This metric here is more of an indicator on how good this campaign is doing. Think about this. These are engaged view conversions. What does this. It means that I've taken a very interested person here and confirmed that they're probably either A going to buy anyway. And when Google does show these ads to these people, I get 95 essentially clicks for two. That's good conversion, right? That's a 3% on remarketing. Good. That's fine. But I also don't even get click conversions on 50 people. So what we're looking at here is how much is remarketing helping? There's certain indicators you can look at to know that remarketing is helping, that better indicators are coming from YouTube. Well, you have engaged view conversions that you don't have a display that's helpful. You also have a captive audience that you know is just wasting time. That's good. When a person's on YouTube, it's either they're listening to music or they're watching videos, or maybe they're trying to make their purchase decision now by looking up, solutions eight reviews solutions, eight scam, you know, solutions eight, you know, additional video, whatever it may be. If someone's doing, let's just say a search for us, or search for Google Ads agencies, best Google Ads agencies, and we can continually stay in front of them, we will reinforce that purchase decision. I don't wanna spend too much on that. Because you will hit a point of diminishing returns because most of the time it's more expensive to bring a person back than it is to get a new person. And it's more expensive to bring a person back if these people are halfway interested. So, any questions so far? I think we have a couple chats. I just wanted to see John, you talk about why you, generally prefer not to use your marketing. Yep. So it's not that necessarily I prefer not to. Tim, one of the things that I was actually gonna say too and we'll move to it next, is a lot of times you can actually use different networks to remarket. Facebook, for example, does very good at remarketing. Again, it's a captive audience. It remarks like YouTube does display. I'm trying to capture people in a household. that are on the internet, because remember, Google is going to use household remarketing. They're not using individual device remarketing anymore. I saw this this morning and I really, really, really wanna find it. I'm gonna find it again. But there was a metric inside of Google that I saw this morning that says, by the way, in order to measure households with cross devices, we're going to take an average of the users that we believe are the same people. But there will be varying degrees of. Discrepancies, but we're using I forget exactly what they call it, but basically some algorithmic version of what they think happened. So it's actually not even real numbers instead of the remarketing campaign specifically. So unique users are blank a lot of times because it's not, known, for example. But I would say that captive audience remarketing, which means where their attention is given, is more effective than banner ads. That's my opinion. Facebook captive, Instagram captive, YouTube captive websites, they're actively doing something right now. So is it more effective in a visual representation for the user? Yes. I think. I would prefer Facebook over display remarketing. I absolutely would. when you look at the splits and you look at the conversion paths, a lot of times it's cheaper to get a person first click on standard shopping and also cheaper to have Facebook remarket them. And now I have those two channels working together. I prefer other channels than Google for marketing, so that's why I usually don't use your marketing a lot instead of Google.