Results Services Why Me Tools Blog About Contact Let's Talk Growth →

₹62 Crore Managed Across
Eight Ad Accounts And 18 Markets.

EdTech Company 1, an education and professional-training business, operates through multiple subsidiaries. I run paid acquisition across all of them — six Google Ads accounts and two Meta accounts, from India through the Gulf to North America and Australia.

EdTech Company 1 Education & Professional Training · Google Ads + Meta Ads · 2019 – ongoing
The Scale
₹62.9Cr
Ad spend under direct management — across 8 accounts and two platforms
1.58M
Leads generated
lifetime
461M
Impressions
delivered
₹398
Blended cost
per lead
915 campaigns under management 18 markets 603 campaigns targeting outside India 2 platforms — Google & Meta
The Account Architecture

Most performance marketers manage one account. This is a group structure — separate ad accounts for separate subsidiaries and separate billing currencies, each with its own conversion setup, budget ceiling and market. The work isn't running campaigns; it's deciding which of eight accounts a rupee belongs in.

AccountPlatformMandateSpendLeads
FlagshipGoogleCore acquisition — languages, SAP, Six Sigma, DBA₹54.4 Cr1,428,610
SAP specialisationsGoogle13 dedicated SAP module campaigns₹2.17 Cr49,920
InternationalGoogle USDUSA, language & TEFL — billed in dollars₹2.53 Cr15,499
Meta International AccountMetaInternational DBA — Gulf, Mauritius₹2.21 Cr39,088
Meta Growth AccountMetaFranchise, language & social demand₹1.37 Cr49,354
Review network ×3GoogleBrand defence across 5 review microsites₹18.6 L
Three of the eight accounts exist purely for brand defence — holding the first page on review and comparison searches so paid demand doesn't leak to competitors.
The Markets
India
National and state-level campaigns, split by regional demand economics
Gulf & Middle East
UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain
Asia–Pacific
Singapore, Malaysia, Australia
Americas & Africa
USA, Canada, Mauritius, South Africa, Nigeria
Two-thirds of campaigns target outside India — different search behaviour, different currencies, different cost structures, one team.
Inside The Flagship Account

Scale is the easy half. The harder question is whether efficiency holds as budget grows. Here is a five-month window inside the flagship account — a ₹1 crore-a-month operation — starting from its least efficient month on record.

Cost per lead, month by month ₹465 ₹438
AprMayJunJulAug

Five consecutive monthly declines — while cost per click rose 8.9%

−5.9%
Cost per lead
₹465 → ₹438
+15.7%
Conversion rate
11.17% → 12.93%
121.8K+
Leads in the
five-month window
₹5.4Cr+
Spend in the
five-month window

The Problem

Before touching a bid, I mapped where efficiency actually sat. Cost per lead ranged 25× across the account — ₹47 to ₹1,185. That isn't variance, it's a routing problem. 32 of 55 campaigns were running above blended CPL while absorbing 47% of spend. Twelve efficient campaigns were capped by budget. And with Target CPA running on 53 of 55 campaigns, the bidding was only ever going to be as good as the conversion signal underneath it — which had gaps.

The Intervention

  • Keywords — match types and intent tiers restructured so budget follows purchase intent, not search volume
  • Location targeting — split by state-level economics; regional and national demand price differently and shouldn't share a bid
  • Landing pages — rebuilt for the highest-spend verticals, where a point of conversion rate is worth the most
  • Tracking — conversion measurement corrected first, so automated bidding optimised toward real leads
  • Campaign optimisation — budget systematically reallocated from the ₹1,100 CPL tail toward the ₹331 CPL core
9 of 12 major campaigns improved CPL +8,906 additional leads vs the prior conversion rate Modelled ₹2.7Cr+ of spend moved to better efficiency 54 campaigns across 8 verticals
CampaignSpendApr CPLAug CPLChange
Language Campaign — French₹40.6 L₹526₹430−18.4%
Language Campaign — Japanese₹17.2 L₹474₹398−15.9%
SAP Campaign — Generic₹32.7 L₹392₹331−15.5%
Six Sigma Campaign — Generic₹26.2 L₹737₹637−13.6%
What Managing At This Scale Teaches
01

At eight accounts, allocation beats optimisation. The largest gains don't come from improving a campaign — they come from noticing an account is the wrong home for the budget it holds.

02

Measurement comes before bidding. Automated bidding is a signal amplifier — feed it an unreliable conversion signal and it will scale the wrong thing efficiently.

03

Budget caps on efficient campaigns are the most expensive error in a large account. Twelve capped campaigns held 29% of spend — the account was throttling its own winners.

04

A market is not a translation. Gulf, US and Indian demand price differently, convert differently and search differently. Running 18 markets means 18 cost structures, not one campaign duplicated.

05

A 25× CPL spread is a routing problem, not a creative problem. The fix is moving money, not making more ads.

06

Falling CPL against rising CPC is the only efficiency that counts. Clicks got 8.9% more expensive over these five months. The gain came from the funnel, not the market.

Spending at this scale and not sure where the waste is?

Let’s Talk

Figures compiled from the client’s own Google Ads and Meta Ads account exports across eight accounts, covering all available reporting history to 31 August 2026. The five-month efficiency window is 1 April – 30 August 2026, measured April vs August. The international account bills in USD and is converted at ₹83/USD; at any higher rate the figure understates. Market count is derived from campaign-level targeting in campaign names. Figures marked Modelled are derived, not observed — engagement click volume evaluated at the pre-engagement conversion rate. All amounts INR unless stated.