Meta or Google: should we cut Meta?
Executive summary
- Karya's own CRM shows more Meta applications than the report. 41 in September, against 31 in the report. At Legend it is 12, not 3.
- At the 8 properties running both, Meta brought the most applications. 41 from Meta, 25 from Google. 24 of Google's came from the free Google listing.
- In Karya's CRM, most Google leads come from the free listing. In September: 261 leads from the free Google listing, 12 from paid Google ads.
- The 16× figure rests on 3 move-ins. One more Meta move-in would cut Meta's cost per move-in by $1,711.
- Meta was judged too early. Its leads were 13 to 25 days old. Google ran 6 months, Meta 7 to 27 days.
- Where both ran longest, results match. At Legend, 1.3% of Meta leads moved in, against 1.2% for Google.
- Meta leads apply less often per lead. We have a plan to raise that, with your team's help.
The report next to Karya's own data
| The report says | What the data shows | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Meta brought 31 applications | Karya's CRM shows 41. Legend has 12, not 3. | ↓Undercounted |
| Google brings 50% of move-ins | Most CRM leads tagged Google come from the free listing (261 vs 12 paid) | ≠Likely mixes free and paid |
| Meta costs $6,842 per move-in | Based on 3 move-ins | …Too early |
| September Meta leads are 40 days old | Typical lead was 13 to 25 days old | ✕Incorrect |
| McDowell, Google: 2 applications, 4 move-ins | More move-ins than applications | !Data error |
| Same spend on Google = about 6× the residents | Searches per property are limited | ?Unproven |
| Meta leads apply less often | Correct per lead. CRM shows 2.6%, report 2.0%. | ✓Holds |
Karya's CRM shows more Meta applications than the report
| Property | Karya's CRM | The report |
|---|---|---|
| Tolleson | 16 | 15 |
| Legend | 12 | 3 |
| La Primavera | 4 | 4 |
| Palace | 8 | 8 |
| Bay Oaks | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 41 | 31 |
The other properties match the report closely. The difference is at Legend.
With 12 applications, Meta's cost per application at Legend is about $336, not $1,342. 34 of the 41 have our ad recorded as their source.
Meta brought more applications than any other single source
Same 8 properties, same month, counted the same way. Meta leads apply less often per lead, but Meta brings so many more leads that it still adds the most applications.
In Karya's CRM, most Google leads come from the free listing
- Tolleson: 5 Google move-ins and $2 leads from a $250 budget.
- McDowell: 4 Google move-ins from 2 applications.
People who find the property on Google Maps would come in without any ad spend.
If the report counted them as Google, its cost per Google move-in divides the paid budget by free results.
Meta was judged too early
Meta's leads were 2 to 3 weeks old, and three properties ran Meta for one week. It is too soon to tell which of these leads will move in.
Three move-ins is too few to decide either way
One more move-in would cut Meta's cost per move-in by $1,711. A result this small can move a lot in either direction.
At Legend, where both ran longest, results were close
Google was cheaper per move-in at Legend by about a quarter. The report's overall figure is 16 times.
Some of Meta's tours may have been counted as Google
Karya's CRM puts the same "ga" label on every tour, whatever the source. If the report read that label as Google, Meta's tours went to Google. The report doesn't say which rule it used.
Google can only grow as far as people search
Google ads only show when someone searches. Past a point, more Google spend buys the same people at a higher price. Meta can keep reaching new renters, as long as those leads keep turning into move-ins.
Meta fills the tour calendar and gets better with data
Many of these renters weren't searching yet, so they need more follow-up. When we send Meta the leads who toured, it finds more people like them. Meta reports this lowers the cost of a good lead by 15% on average.
Meta leads apply less often. Here is how we'll raise that.
- Change the Tolleson ad that brings most of its leads.
- Ask "When do you plan to move?" on the form. Use Meta's stricter form setting so fewer casual leads come through.
- Send booked tours back to Meta, so it finds more people who tour.
- Keep following up for 60 days with leads who aren't ready to move yet.
- Why did people who toured not apply? (price, unit, timing, approval)
- Which leads were a bad fit, and why?
- What do the people who moved in have in common?
- Mark it in the system: showed, no-show, applied.
Per lead, Meta applies at 2.6% in Karya's CRM against about 9% for Google leads. Your answers change who we target and what the ads say.
Decide on November 25, with both channels counted the same
- Which rule made a lead "Google"? Did it include the free Google listing?
- Why does the report show 3 Meta applications at Legend when the CRM shows 12?
- Does "application submitted" in the CRM mean a finished application?
- Can we see the list of Google move-ins, to match against our leads?