for Goodier Labs
Meta Ads · Jul 27 - Aug 25

Turning attention into booked calls.

Across 30 days Meta produced 57 inbound leads from skincare founders and product leads, at $103.12 each. The ads earned 4,563 clicks at a 5.60% click-through rate across every interaction, and 2.73% counting only the clicks that opened the website, against the 1-2% typical of cold B2B prospecting. It also drew 26,299 video views of the lab itself. The cheapest of them, "Where The Formula Sharpens", is bringing leads in at $46.21.

See the journey ↓ What we do next →
Meta Ads · Jul 27 - Aug 25

The story of the lab is converting.

Goodier Labs sells something a brand founder chooses once and lives with for years: a manufacturing partner. That is a considered, high-trust decision, and it is why the campaign leads with the lab itself rather than with an offer.

Meta · Facebook + Instagram · objective: leads (discovery calls) · currency USD · window Jul 27 - Aug 25
57
Inbound leads
2.2x vs last period
$103.12
Cost per lead
19% cheaper vs last period
5.60%
Click-through rate
2.73% to the site, vs the 1-2% B2B norm
26,299
Video views
$5,878 media spend
Meta Ads, Jul 27 - Aug 25. A lead is a completed discovery-call enquiry recorded by the Goodier Labs pixel, counted once.
The read

What this period proved.

Each campaign runs a different job, so they are read on their own terms rather than blended into one number.

01
$103.12

The cost per lead is going down.

It moved from $127.16 to $103.12, 19% down, while leads went from 26 to 57. Buying more of the same lead is getting cheaper, not more expensive, which is what lets us scale.

02
$46.21

The newer creative is the cheaper one.

"Where The Formula Sharpens" brings a lead in at $46.21 against $138.26 for "Inside the Lab", the volume leader. The lead is no longer coming from one video, and the cheaper angle is the one to build on.

03
$79.22

Prospecting – United States is the cheapest source.

It produced 36 leads at $79.22 and holds a 5.84% click-through. It is the campaign to feed as it proves out.

Measure Last period
Jun 27 - Jul 26		 This period
Jul 27 - Aug 25		 Change
Leads26572.2x vs last period
Click-through rate5.01%5.60%Flat vs last period
Site visits1,3822,018+46% vs last period
Video views21,48026,299+22% vs last period
Media spend$3,306$5,878+78% vs last period
Cost per lead$127.16$103.1219% cheaper vs last period
The funnel

From a scroll to a booked call.

The full path a skincare founder takes, from seeing the lab in their feed to enquiring about their own product.

81,469
Impressions
26,299 video views
2,226
Link clicks
Opened the website
2,018
Site visits
91% of clicks arrive
57
Leads
$103.12 each
→
91% of clicks turn into an actual site visit. Of 2,226 link clicks, 2,018 loaded the page. On most paid accounts a quarter to a third are lost between the tap and the page, so this means the site is fast and the message matches what the ad promised. From there, roughly 1 in every 35 visitors enquires.
Link clicks are the clicks that opened the Goodier Labs site. The 5.60% click-through rate counts every interaction with the ad, including video expands and reactions, which is why the two numbers differ.
Where the budget went

Which campaign performed best.

Three campaigns run three different jobs, so they are read on their own terms rather than blended into one number. Ranked by cost per lead, cheapest first.

CampaignRole* SpendImpressionsCTR Site visitsLeadsCost / lead
Prospecting – United StatesNZ 01 - Leads - Goodier Prospecting - USCold$2,852.0536,0725.84%93936$79.22
RetargetingNZ 02 - Leads - Goodier RetargetingWarm$1,453.6215,1727.06%47211$132.15
Prospecting – TexasNZ 01 - Leads - Goodier Prospecting - TexasCold$1,572.2830,2254.59%60710$157.23
Total$5,877.9581,4695.60%2,01857$103.12
* Role is our label, not Meta’s. Cold = people who have not met Goodier Labs before. Warm = people who have already seen the brand or visited the site.
→
Prospecting – United States is the strongest campaign, and it is where the next dollar should go. It earns a 5.84% click-through and produced the most leads at 36 at $79.22, 23% below the account average.
The creative

The cheapest lead is not the loudest ad.

Every ad is a video built on the lab’s credibility: 600+ formulations, a 98.2% right-first-time record, and a building that has been making product since 1922. Ranked by the leads each one drove.

Leads by creative

Leads
Inside the Lab video ad #1 · 13 leads $138.26 / lead
Inside the Lab
Leads13CTR4.76%Spend$1,797Impressions35,473
Watch the ad ▸
Where The Formula Sharpens video ad In rotation $46.21 / lead
Where The Formula Sharpens
Leads12CTR6.83%Spend$555Impressions8,611
Watch the ad ▸
Biggest Mistakes Skincare Startups Make video ad In rotation $119.07 / lead
Biggest Mistakes Skincare Startups Make
Leads11CTR5.52%Spend$1,310Impressions12,042
Watch the ad ▸
What Goes Into Your Formula video ad In rotation
What Goes Into Your Formula
Leads6CTR6.30%Spend$604Impressions5,766
Watch the ad ▸
Every creative is measured the same way. Cost per lead is badged only where a creative has cleared 10 leads; below that base a single lead moves the figure too far to publish it.
→
The volume leader and the cheapest lead are two different ads. "Inside the Lab" produced the most leads, 13 of 57, but at $138.26 each. "Where The Formula Sharpens" brings one in at $46.21, roughly 3.0 times cheaper. The next round should be built on the cheaper angle while the volume leader keeps running.
Showing the top 4 ads by leads, 42 of the 57 leads in the window. 12 further ads ran and are not pictured.
Who is enquiring

Which audience performed best.

The buyer for a contract manufacturer is a brand founder or product lead. This is who actually responded.

Leads by age and gender

Women Men

Leads by placement

Leads

Cost per lead by platform

Cost per lead · shorter is better

Leads by device

Leads
$93.87
Cost per lead, women
46 leads · 5.95% CTR
9
Leads from men
9 leads · 4.83% CTR
99%
On a phone
iPhone and Android
30
Message conversations started
Not counted in the leads
→
The 35 to 64 founder band takes 80% of spend and returns 70% of leads. Separately, 30 people opened a direct message with Goodier Labs from these ads, which the lead count does not include.
The age, placement and device charts report lead counts rather than a cost per lead. That is an editorial choice, not a floor: several of those groups do clear 10 leads. Counts keep bands of very different size comparable on one axis.
What’s next

Cheaper leads, and the right ones.

Every move below ties to a number on this page, and none of them require starting over.

Move 01 · Creative

Build the next round on the cheaper angle.

"Where The Formula Sharpens" is bringing leads in at $46.21 against $138.26 for "Inside the Lab". The next production should extend the cheaper angle, while the volume leader keeps running untouched.

Why now
Where The Formula Sharpens costs $46.21 per lead, Inside the Lab costs $138.26. Both clear the 10-lead floor, so the gap is real and not a small-sample artefact.
Risk
Low. Nothing is switched off to run this test.
We need
A half day of filming access at the facility.
Move 02 · Budget

Weight the budget to what is converting.

More into Prospecting – United States, and a tilt toward the placements and platforms returning the cheapest leads. None of this requires new creative or new audiences.

Why now
The cheapest campaign is also the highest volume, so scaling it does not cost efficiency.
Evidence
Prospecting – United States: 36 leads at a 5.84% click-through.
We need
Confirmation of the monthly media budget.
Move 03 · Quality

Qualify on volume, in the ad and in the form.

Cost and volume are where we want them. The open question is fit: the bar is 5,000 units a month, and that has to be said out loud in the creative and asked in the form so the algorithm optimises toward it.

Why now
Cost per lead is not the constraint. Fit is, and every period we optimise on raw lead count teaches the algorithm the wrong target.
Risk
Volume dips before it recovers. Every enquiry still reaches the team.
We need
A written description of the ideal customer to build the ad around.
Operating plan

The next 30 days.

  • Extend the cheapest creative, not just the loudest: "Where The Formula Sharpens" at $46.21 per lead against $138.26 for "Inside the Lab".
  • Shift budget toward the cheapest source of leads on the account.
  • Capture the message conversations, so the 30 enquiries arriving by direct message are answered and counted alongside the form leads.
  • Qualify on monthly volume in both the ad and the form, so the 5,000 units a month bar is stated up front and the algorithm optimises toward it.
  • Report on lead quality, not just volume, once the discovery calls have been worked through.
Where this goes

The reach is bought. Now the fit.

Getting a founder to stop, watch a factory tour, and then enquire is the expensive half of this category, and it happened 57 times in this window at $103.12 each. What the ad account cannot yet see is which of those enquiries are the right size. That is the whole job of the next 30 days: say the 5,000 units a month bar out loud in the creative and the form, so the same budget buys fewer and better conversations.

Method: figures are Meta advertising results for the Goodier Labs lead campaigns, Jul 27 - Aug 25, pulled from the Meta Marketing API on Aug 26, 2026. A lead is a completed discovery-call enquiry recorded by the Goodier Labs pixel; Meta records the same enquiry as both an on-site lead and a pixel lead, and it is counted once, never twice. Click-through rate counts every interaction with the ad; link clicks are the subset that opened the website. Cost per lead is published only where there are at least 10 leads, so that a rate is never computed off a base too small to mean anything. Message conversations are Meta’s messaging conversations started, reported separately and not included in the lead count. The 1-2% cold B2B benchmark refers to the LINK click-through rate, and is compared against that rate, not against the all-interaction rate.