0:00 We manage the paid media for one of the largest fashion portfolios in Australia, including Kougy, Blue Illusion, Tony Biano, Pepper Mayo, Steve Madden, 2XU, Caliber, Zoe Craftsman, and another 5 to 10 8 figure fashion brands. That includes 9 figure omni channel retailers, 8 figure omni channel retailers, eight and nine figure pure play direct to consumer only. We have 9 figure direct to consumer with a focus in the US. We have 8 figure direct to consumer with focuses in the UK and Europe. Then we have a bunch that are focused here in Australia working with so many brands. I can tell you with confidence that most fashion brands are running their paid media completely wrong. Not because their agencies are incompetent, but because they're applying generic e-commerce playbooks to a vertical that doesn't work that way. This is the video that I wish existed when we first started managing fashion accounts. Everything I'm about to share comes from real audits, real accounts, and real money spent on the platforms. The core difference in fashion and every other e-commerce vertical is that you're appealing to emotion and you're not agitating on a problem most of the time. 1:00 In supplements, you end up identifying a health problem. You present a solution. Whereas in fashion, the purchase is typically driven through aspiration, identity, and how the product makes someone feel. And so this dichotomy ends up existing within fashion that there are brands that go way too far in one direction, which is pretty rare, and then the others go way too far in this direction. And so you see these new fast scaling startups like House, like Comfort, I would almost put True Classic in here as well. These were all fashion brands that were built off of a focus on function through performance marketing ads. But the reality is is that most fashion brands sit all the way over here on this end of the spectrum where all their content is just campaign shoots, which honestly aren't very friendly to the platforms. And you're not going to drive scale through meta just by having campaign shoots constantly coming in. And so the brands that are winning right now, the brands that are scaling very fast are typically the ones that sit somewhere in the middle. Now, it's not to say that you can't lean all the way into function, but I would argue even all of these guys sit in the middle, 1:59 which is that they lean into the functionality of the clothing within all of their marketing, or at least a big portion of their marketing, but they have this brand component, too, that makes people want to have association with the actual product. There are seven core structural differences in fashion that's worth calling out right at the start of this video. Number one is generally you're going to be appealing to emotion rather than a problem. Now, this isn't always necessarily true. For example, you can make a piece of creative that's going to agitate on a specific problem like having a day dress that turns into a night dress when you're traveling. Okay? So, you are problem agitating on a problem that someone probably has. But ultimately what we're going to appeal to in that creative is more so the emotional feeling of being able to have confidence through not having to change clothes throughout the day or whatever the angle might be. So generally we're leaning hard into emotion in the creative rather than problems which lends itself to an entire different creative approach and creative strategy which we will dive into in this video and I'll show you 2:56 exactly how you need to be approaching creative development and design. Number two is seasonality. Seasonality is structurally built into all fashion brands. Okay? You need to constantly rotate through clothes depending on the season. This becomes even more complex when you have a northern hem and southern hem component of the business. Number three is returns. Returns significantly skew every core metric that you look at in the business. A rorowaz number, although rorowaz is not a great number to use, a rorowaz number in a fashion ad account is very different from a rorowaz number in any other ad account. And the reason being is that this fashion brand might have 50% returns. So this substantially changes the actual rorowaz number that we're seeing in the platform. We thought we drove 10 purchases or five of them will get returned. So we're actually driving half of the impact. So our acquisition me profit contribution all of these core metrics that I'll run you through in this video. They all need to be adjusted for returns. We then have the size curve. The size curve ends up killing performance silently because if a few of your best selling sizes go out 3:55 of stock, your ad performance tanks overnight. Shopping and meta performance will always suddenly decrease because high sell to rate sizes are gone. We then of cross purchasing. This occurs more in fashion than any other vertical which is someone clicks on an ad of let's say a t-shirt and then they go and they browse around on the website and then they end up buying a dress. Now we think that the ad of the shirt or whatever it was got us the purchase and it actually drove a purchase of the shirt but it did nothing like that. It went and drove something in a completely different category. Happens a lot in fashion. Number six is omni channel. Most large fashion retailers at least in Australia have an omni channel presence and it's due to the nature of the product. Generally people want to try the product on. So therefore people are always going to want to purchase and have an in-person experience. Now this creates even further complexity within the strategy because we need to factor in dduplication of instore customers verse online. We need to understand what is the actual impact of paid on revenue realization in the store. Because as you 4:56 go up higher in the funnel in terms of the channel that you're advertising on, let's say you go all the way up to something like YouTube or TV, you will have more revenue capture in your omni channel places than in.com. So you won't see all your YouTube ad spend just result in revenue. You will end up seeing this captured on marketplaces that you're on, on retail stores that you have. anywhere else that people can buy your products, you will end up seeing a lift in revenue. And then number seven is inventory and the balance sheet play nature of fashion, which is that unlike really any other business model, there is so much turnover of product in fashion that you pretty much always inevitably end up with grade C inventory. Inventory that's just not moving or is moving very slowly to that the days on inventory is like 300 days. And so as a product of this, you do need to factor in either organic strategies to be able to move this grade C inventory. But more applicable here is to tie this into the paid media strategy to where we may want to push grade C and grade D inventory through paid to be 5:57 able to get it out of the business and get cash back. But it's going to be a low rorowaz exercise. It's not going to be profitable, but it's going to improve the health of the business. And so this is where you start playing the game of do we want to optimize for profit necessarily in the next week or do we want to optimize for cash to put the business in a healthier position. Now if we just zoom in on this for a second. This concept of a balance sheet play gets really interesting when you take into consideration the virality coefficient in fashion which is that in fashion there are trends and products usually go viral. It gets seen everywhere. Influencers wear it. It blows up on organic. And when you look at the ad account and you look at the spend distribution across all of your different ads and all of the different products in here, what you end up seeing is one particular ad with this product is crushing it. Might have a four times higher efficiency than all of the other ads. And so what naturally happens is all of the spend goes here. And the agency redirects additional spend here and says, "Hey, make more creative for this product that's doing so well." But 6:52 this product probably would have sold anyway. and we are just eroding the contribution margin on that purchase order. So, let me actually run you through an example. Let's say that you had product A, product B, and product C. You bought $10,000 units of each. And then let's say that you have $100,000 in budget to spend this month to sell through these products. Now, product A has an incredible natural sell-through rate. The product has gone viral to some degree, and so sellrough rates are incredibly high. Maybe if we're looking at monthly sell through rates, you're sitting at something like 55%. So in terms of days on inventory, how long will it take to sell through this product, maybe it's about 50 days? Then if we look at days on inventory of the next product, this product isn't selling through very quickly. And so we're looking at maybe 75 days. And then the bottom product was a flop, isn't doing well at all, and maybe we're sitting at 240 days of inventory. Now, as I said before, what will naturally happen within the ad account is that the agency 7:55 or the inhouse performance marketer will go and put all of the spend here because it will have the highest rorowaz. So, if we just go and make a rorowaz column here as well, this is probably going to have something like a 7x. This might have something like a 4.4x. And down here down the bottom, this might have a 2.5x. And so, naturally, all the spend will go here. So, what happens when you go and just start putting 90k of ad spend? So let's say 90% of this spend goes up here. Well, the days on inventory goes down because we increase sellrough rate. We start selling a bunch of this product and maybe days on inventory after a couple days drops to something like 9. Now days on inventory here remains relatively the same. Obviously a few days pass. So let's take a little bit off it. But we're not really getting much sellrough rate cuz we're not putting really any budget here. Now you can probably tell what the issue is is that we just took all of our media budget and put it behind a product that would have sold anyway. it would have just taken 50 days and we now compressed it down to nine. If we now look at the contribution margin on this particular purchase order, let's say 8:56 that this was like a million in revenue, 50% gross margin to $500,000 in gross profit. We had 500K in gross profit. And in case these numbers aren't making sense to you, I'd recommend going and watching our finance e-commerce video, which is a 1 and a half hour master class like this that breaks down financial metrics. 500,000 gross profit. And then if we go to contribution margin, we just need to minus off all this ad spend, which is 410 because we wanted to spend about 90k here. So the main point is that we were going to make 500k if we didn't spend on ads. We spent on ads, we sped up how quickly we sold the product. Amazing. But now we make less money. So why did we even do this in the first place? And this is the dilemma of fashion because wouldn't we have just been better off actually putting no ad spend behind that winning product, made sure that we made half a million dollars in contribution margin, and we didn't actually erode this margin at all. And instead, we go and put all of our ad spend here and here. Not good returns, but these products aren't going to sell. We need them to sell or else we'll have to take them to sale, which 9:57 is a bad look in itself. So, we have our own disadvantages of taking products to sale. And then if we do this like yes let's say the rorowes is bad it's at a 4.4 and a 2.5 but it will drop the days on inventory down. So rather than days on inventory being 75 maybe this dynamic changes to 30 meaning we will actually sell through this product. Now this product maybe it's terrible. Okay even with ads it's performing at a terrible row as people aren't buying it but we managed to drop the days on inventory to 100. Well amazing because now when we do take this product to sale if we decide to there's hopefully not much product left and we've done a good job at moving most of it. Now, the contribution margin here is probably going to be $0. Contribution margin here is probably not going to be a lot. Maybe it's like 50K. But overall, we're in a much better position because if we didn't do this, these products wouldn't have sold anywhere. And so, our contribution margin would have actually been negative because we would have had to have taken these products to sale and likely taken a loss on them, which would have brought down the contribution margin of this PO. 10:54 And now this will always be the case forever in every fashion ad account, not just at a product level, but at an ad level, at every single level in the business, because this is fundamentally just Pareto's principle, which is that 20% of whatever we're talking about drives 80% of results. And so 20% of products will always drive 80% of revenue or 80% of performance. 20% of ads will always drive 80% of performance. And where this gets a lot crazier is that Pareto's principle applies into itself. And so of the top 20%, the top 20% of the 20% drives 80% of the 80%. Right? And so what this ends up equaling out to when you times them together is that 4% of products, 4% of ads drive 64% of total revenue. This is really critical to understand because you will have always have majority of your ad spend over half of your ad spend pull into just a couple ads within the and so you want to be sure that if you are going to go and push that much spend behind an ad you want enough days on inventory to be able to actually support it or are you just eroding the contribution margin on that PO and there's no point in even pushing it 11:54 anywhere. Another dynamic that exists within fashion is surfacing products at scale. A large multi-figure retailer that we were talking to put this really well. They called it the trench coat problem. And this is that they sell trench coats, but nobody even knows about it because they might have 2,000 products active on the website at all times and people aren't navigating the website at least in enough detail to ever know that they sell trench coat. So ultimately, how do we use paid media as a vehicle to be able to drive up awareness across the entire product portfolio, especially when 80% of spend will only go into 20% of these products? So Prito's principle will automatically put you on the back foot because it will want to be distributing spend to just a few products and just those products will surface onto Facebook, onto Google, etc. So how do we structure the accounts in a way that we can better surface products with lower sellrough rates and I'll tell you how to do it later in the video. So the structure from here is we'll dive into the financial model. What makes fashion different from KPIs to how you need to think through financial modeling and growth? We'll 12:53 then go into measurement and attribution and how this is fundamentally unique in the fashion niche. We'll then go into account structure. I'll show you how to think through account structure on Meta and Google and what works best. We'll then dive into creative strategy. We'll then go into seasonal strategy. We'll then go into how to scale particularly into international markets. We'll then wrap it all into the playbook by ad spend level. So based on where your current ad spend is, you will have core action items by the end. And then lastly, we're going to do some live ad reviews. I want to show you ads that actually work well in fashion so that you can understand the core components within ads that makes them do well. So with that being said, let's dive into the financial model. So the best metric for indexing the performance of paid media in fashion is going to be a 180day LTGP to capac. And the reason for this is that gross profit growth within the first 180 days actually changes a lot brand to brand. Now on average, what you want to be KPIing against to give you some retention benchmarks is at day 90 good fashion brands will see 15% lift in gross profit from their existing 13:53 customers. Then by day 365, good fashion brands will see about 55% left in gross profit. If you're not hitting these benchmarks, you need to be way more efficient on the front end of actually acquiring a customer. Now, a big mistake in fashion, a very very big mistake is to measure just against first purchase gross profit against CAC, which is a very common exercise. So you will look at your average order value. Let's say that your average order value is $200. You'll say on average our gross profit is 50%. So, we make $100 in gross profit. Therefore, we want a 2LTGP to CAC or a first purchase GP to CAC. So, we want our cost to acquire to be $50. Therefore, we're at a two, which is not bad. Now, the issue here, and this is where a lot of people make a mistake, is that this doesn't encapsulate the returns. And so you may have a 50% return rate in which case your CAC is actually 2x higher because yes you are driving 100 customers let's say but 50 of them return their product and then don't come back and buy a second time. 14:54 And so as a product of that your CAC actually isn't 50. Your CAC is 100 which means your first purchase to CAC ratio is a one. And this is not a good position to be in. So you always want to extend your lifetime value slightly to fashion because you want to encapsulate the time period in which a return or a refund might actually occur. Now not only that, a big issue within fashion actually lies in this gross profit calculation. And what's wrong about it is that most brands rely on taking products to sale when they don't sell them. And so you will have your grade C, arguably even your grade B and C inventory that ends up not selling through fast enough during that particular season. So you go and spin it off onto a sale page and you take it to sale to try to sell through it. Now the issue here obviously is that all of these sales erode your average gross margin. And so the gross margin number that you're using to calculate this on is this based on the average gross margin inclusive of all of the sale items going on. Is this non-inclusive and this is just your full price GP? Like gross profit percentages get 15:55 complex once you start to introduce the fact that you're always taking products to sale. And so you need to understand what the gross margin numbers are inclusive and exclusive of all of these items always going to sale. And then if you don't take products to sale and you just burn them, so you donate product or you simply just don't sell through it and you do something with it to get rid of it, well then you also need to take that into consideration as a cost against your average GP percentage. We then have inventory economics within fashion. If you're actually working in a fashion brand, you obviously know all about this. This is more so for the performance marketers that might be working in house or any agencies that might be watching this, which is that your products fall into four different categories of inventory. This is based on sellrough rates. Grade A, it's selling very quickly. You should actually be worried about them selling out. Grade B, it's moving slow. Grade C, it's pretty much not moving at all. Grade D, it's not moving at all. You're selling none. This is like a 0% sellthrough rate. And some people don't even have grade D in the way that they 16:50 rank products. Now, the fundamental thing to understand here, whether it's a seven, eight, or nine figure business, is that you can end up pooling a bunch of inventory here, and you can end up having like $10 million in inventory that's grade C that isn't moving. And even though the business might be cash flowing $10 million in profit this year, because $10 million is held in inventory, they don't actually have this cash. And so, it's a very terrible position to be in. They need to figure out how to sell through this inventory. Now, you can often try to sell through inventory using a paid strategy. Okay? You can prioritize these products in a shopping campaign. And you can prioritize these products and make more creative for meta. You could prioritize them in Tik Tok on a new channel. You could move them into a different country based on seasonality. So there's a lot of different stuff and there's a lot of different strategies that you can employ, but often this is just limited to organic strategies rather than actually tying in paid. Now, the interesting dynamic to be across here is that if you do go and start pushing gradec inventory through ads, there is a 17:42 potential branding component that needs to be considered, which is that if we're just taking our bad product that people don't want to buy and we're surfacing that in paid ads, well, is that really the front-end visuals that we want to give to new customers? Is that hey, our brand is not these excellent products that everyone likes. Our brand is all these terrible products. And so that is where sometimes brands can be a bit iffy with pushing products more aggressively in paid. But this is where just understanding budget allocations across the three uh grades of inventory and understanding that we could just prioritize grade C and existing customer retargeting. Like there's a lot of different strategies that could be employed here. But it is really important for agencies to be across this dynamic or else they end up just over prioritizing winners. Another really important component that exists within fashion is cohort quality over time. And so as you're acquiring customers in Jan, Feb, March, these customers end up being super high quality. They often have lower return rates and they often have much better LTV uplift. But then as you move through into November, December, 18:43 you end up having considerably higher return rates and considerably lower LTV off these customers. And is because they are discount orientated. Number one. Number two, there's a lot of gifting going on. And number three, is it dependent on your returns policy? This is the best opportunity of all time for consumers to just buy literally 10 units of your product, try them all on, and the ones that they don't like, go and refund them. And this is this whole mentality within fashion, which is that people will buy a whole of products, try them all on, and then just return the ones that they don't like and keep one or two. And so this ends up substantially changing what the front-end efficiency looks like on paid or on the business as a whole. If you're not taking into consideration how much returns you expect to actually occur or if you have a returns policy that allows for this, obviously you're in a pretty bad position and you're going to get taken advantage of. I have actually seen brands in international markets with return rates from 80 to 100% during discount periods. So that means 100% of 19:45 their revenue gets refunded, which is crazy. So their efficiency is a zero. And this is because people just buy a ton of the product and then they end up returning it. And because of the way that their returns policy is structured as well as I think the positioning of the brand in that market over time, they have been attracting a customer that does this a lot. And so this substantially changes then how we need a KPI paid media because if we're looking at like a 4X rorowaz, we need to take into consideration that this needs to be discounted by 80 to 100%. This is also really important when you are KPIing November December and so what a lot of agencies or internal teams will do is let's say in Jan Feb we are happy with an acquisition me for those that haven't watched any of our other videos and this is your first time acquisition me is new customer revenue divided by ad spend so this is a great measure of efficiency on paid media let's say in Jan Feb your acquisition me is a four and then in November December your acquisition me is a four the issue here is this is way better than this because you're going to have way higher return rates here that 20:46 aren't encapsulated in this front-end metric and you're going to have worse LTV. So, this acquisition me needs to actually be higher during Black Friday and typically substantially higher dependent on what your expected changes in return rates and LTV. And so, you want to have these numbers leading into this period so that you can be prepared accordingly and so that you know what kind of efficiency targets you want to hit. You always need to back propagate from the bottom of the P&L when it comes to setting KPIs. So ultimately for this period, what is our if we want to really take this all the way down to the bottom, what is our net profit target for November, December. From there, we then layer on our opex and we get a contribution profit target and then from there we now know what kind of revenue volume do we need to hit and this will be constrained based on inventory at what ad spend efficiency. And then if we know what revenue and ad spend efficiency we need to hit, we can then back propagate this into the actual efficiency target in the month and understand that it's inclusive of return rates and the lower LTV dynamic. Another important dynamic in the financial model 21:47 is spend towards existing customers. Now in a lot of industries, our internal SOP is to allocate close to 0% to existing customers in paid media. And the reason being is that paid media often isn't very incremental at all at targeting existing customers unless there's some kind of new product launch that we want to surface in front of them because a lot of these people just might not see the email or might not see the organic socials and so we want to get it in front of their screens. Now the unique dynamic about fashion is obviously that there are product drops every 1 2 3 weeks depending on the brand and so because there is so much surfacing of new product we do need to get it in front of existing customers and as a function of that paid media does become incremental for fashion brands and we actually learned this the hard way about 3 years ago which is that internally we're very much so of the opinion with all of the incrementality tests and lift tests that we've run that spending on existing customers is not a very good use of capital. You don't need to spend a lot. Most people are overspending. And so we brought that idea into a lot of our fashion accounts, too. Until we 22:48 started running inverse holdout tests to be able to validate it. And what we found out was that actually no, existing customer spend is incremental in fashion. So you want to be careful here, especially if you watch any of our other content where I always say don't target existing customers. Don't target existing customers. The one caveat to that is in fashion. So the question becomes, okay, well how much spend as a percentage do we allocate to existing customers? And the answer is thinking through this problem as a percentage is a terrible way to think about. Instead, what you want to be doing is using this formula. CPM times frequency times number of existing customers that you have. And so, just as a worked theory, if you have $20 CPMs on targeting existing customers, you want a frequency over a 7-day, sorry, this is over a 30-day period. Uh, so if you want a frequency at a six, I wouldn't recommend, just as a side note, having a frequency above a seven. Complete waste of money. I also wouldn't recommend having it below a three. And so in this range is where you want to sit it. It's going to be up to you. It's going to be up to how much creative refresh you have 23:47 going into this campaign as well as what your product drop cadence looks like. Let's say you want a six. And then let's say you have 500,000 existing customers. And because this CPMs, we just need to do a divide by a,000 at the bottom here. And that will give us $60,000 a month. So if we want to target half a million existing customers six times a month and our CPMs is $20, we need to spend 60k. And this is way higher than most people because these CPMs are often way lower and you can pull frequency down a little bit. So this is the way that you modulate existing customer spend within a fashion brand. Measurement and attribution within fashion. Fashion is probably the most notorious category other than CPG for overattribution within the platforms. And the reason being is that if you have a fashion brand that's been around for a while, your returning customer revenue as a percentage of total revenue generally tends to be pretty high. It's at least 30% sometimes all the way up to 70 75% if new customer growth is slowed down. And so because of that, you end up with massive overattribution in the platform simply from view through 24:47 conversions or from ads that yes serve to people. Yes, they click, but it isn't actually causally related to the purchase. And so, I'll give you some real examples of 9 figure fashion brands that I've audited. Example, a meta return on ad spend. When you just look at the last 30 days when I did an audit was 36x. Now, right away, this should be ringing alarm bells. Like, no one's at a 36x return on Meta. It's a few dollars in terms of a CPA. Then when you delineate down to 7-day click row for those that don't know how to do this in meta if you've got it pulled up right now you go to columns compare attribution settings and you click on 7-day click and it will give you the 7-day click read which takes out all the view through conversions and this number dropped to a 17 act still pretty high. Then do that exercise again. Columns, compare attribution settings, but this time click on incremental attribution. And what this is going to do is use hold out groups to be able to identify the actual causal relationship of paid by seeing if people are buying even when they're not seeing ads. And what happened then is the row dropped to an 25:48 8.22x. And the kicker here, why this matters so much is that the acquisition me in the business is an 8x. And so suddenly you can see we build congruency once we go down to incremental attribution against acquisition me. This is so over inflated and is misleading you in terms of decision-m and so is this. I'll give you one more example just cuz you believe me and I could give you 10 examples of this. This is another multi-figure fashion brand. Their rorowaz in the platform is a 13.6. When you go to 7-day click it drops to an 8.6. And then once you open up incremental attribution, it drops to a 5.16. Their acquisition me in the business is a 4.4. Now you can see that if you're using this number to make decisions, it doesn't really make much sense when it's 3x off the actual financial reality. And so you want to be looking for as tight congruency as possible between the numbers that you're actually looking at in the platform and the numbers that are occurring within the P&L. It's also really critical in fashion due to the 26:49 refund and return rates that all of your metrics and we actually had to build out custom metrics so that this was possible within our internal analytics software is that we have two definitions of every core metric that we're tracking against. For example, with acquisition me acquisition me and then acquisition me adjusted. So am by itself is net new customer revenue divided by ad spend total ad spend across all platforms. Now the reason why this ends up being a good metric but not necessarily always contextually relevant in fashion is because of the refund. What will actually happen in quite a few brands is refunds will sometimes spike on a particular day when the team decides to process a lot of the refunds. And so as a function of that when you look at acquisition me over time it might look relatively stable and then suddenly you have this drop. And now looking at just this metric here you look at this dip and you try to troubleshoot and you go okay why did this dip? What happened in the platforms? What change happened? what was the difference in product sellrough rates? Did conversion rates drop or sessions drop? Like what actually occurred? But instead, if you 27:51 just go and look at net new customer revenue plus adback returns, you take returns out of the graph, what you actually end up finding is that acquisition me is stable and that the kick in revenue was actually being caused by returns being processed. And so having both of these available to you and having a KPI on the adjusted value and then the unadjusted value is really critical because you might not actually hit your efficiency for the week, but it might not have anything to do with the actual efficiency you achieved on the platform, but it might be to do with refunds spiking because of a particular product portfolio that's currently getting pushed. And so having insight into that and being able to understand what's our unadjusted uh target and then what's our adjusted target and then if we hit one but not the other, we know that returns ultimately were the issue. And then we need to troubleshoot deeper into what actual products led to those returns. And then in omni which means that you have retail stores there becomes the problem of dduplication which is that let's say someone goes into a retail store of yours over here and then they purchase and then after a 28:52 while they come to the online store. This is a PDP and then they end up buying. Well on Shopify this is going to be tagged up and considered as a firsttime customer. if we're not using Shopify POS over here and these are sitting on two different systems and so this person actually gets registered as first time twice. They get registered as first time in the store and then first time online. Ideally, we want to dduplicate this so that this gets referenced as a returning customer. Number one, it's going to give us a more accurate representation of our CAC and acquisition M and all of these metrics that are based on this first time tagging. But number two, this becomes important as well for targeting because if we're targeting campaigns purely for new customer acquisition, we don't really want to be targeting this person. Now, yes, there can be a strategy to try to bring people from offline to online for sure, but if we're trying to go truly cold, we don't want this person included. And so if a client has a CDP that brings together retail customers and online customers and we can 29:54 dduplicate what we will do is have our regular ENCAC calculation which is just online Shopify firsttime new customers divided by ad spend and then we'll have what we call our true NCAAC which is true new customers that have been dduplicated against offline divided by ad spend. And what you end up finding obviously is that the true ENCAC is much higher than the ENCAC that we think it is. And so we might see a $70 ENCAC when we're measuring against Shopify's firsttime customers, but once we dduplicate the data, this jumps to $100. Now, ideally, what we want to start seeing is we want to start seeing more true new customer acquisition and a decrease in this number. And so we actually have a case study that we'll put out at some point where we did this exact exercise and we started excluding all of the retail new customers with the true new customer list. And what we saw was these two numbers converge. And so true rank was up here at like $100 and our ENAC down here was at $70. And then what we saw was our ENAC started to creep up. it was becoming more expensive 30:55 to acquire customers or it was seemingly looking like it was more expensive. But our true new customer came down and actually converge to the same number which was at around about 80. And so when we look at omni channel dduplicated data and then we look at just online data, it was starting to tell the exact same picture. The reason being is we were able to substantially increase the volume of true new customer acquisition which started to blend out the difference between these two numbers. So for account structure in meta there's two issues that we typically see in audits. Number one is there's over segmentation and this is based on the fact that there are so many products in fashion and so people believe that they need a segment to the level of the product width which ends up meaning that accounts with like a 50k a month budget or 100k a month budget have like 21 campaigns. They have reach campaigns, traffic campaigns, they have all these different products segmented. They have their sales that take it further off campaigns. It ends up just being so much oversegmentation that it substantially decreases performance. Number two, and this isn't a mistake, this is something 31:53 you need to keep in mind, is that there is the product launch cadence that exists within fashion. So, how do we constantly introduce products without resetting learning phases, disrupting campaigns, but then also not creating hundreds of different campaigns. So, how do we structure to facilitate this? Well, at sub50k a month, I always recommend keeping it very very simple. This isn't enough budget to be able to introduce heavy levels of segmentation or complexity into the account, and neither should you need to. And so I would have one testing campaign. This can be a CBO or an It honestly doesn't matter. And there's reasons for one, there's reasons for the other. This is going to come down to personal preference and how you want to structure the ad account. But the core premise here is that you have separate adsets and every time you have new product launches, it goes in its own ads set. You can also segment this based on concepts. You can segment it based on margin, on product type, etc. There's a lot of different structure that you need to think through here, which I'll give you more clarity on in a moment. Then one scaling CBO. Now, this is only going 32:49 to be applicable and there's only going to be something that you put into the account if this is running as an and if you can run assets for a long period of time. A big issue in fashion is that ads will only have one product in them. Why that's an issue is that if this is a really good ad, if it's a winning ad, it does incredibly well. Well, the second this product goes out of stock or even like core sizes within the size curve go out of stock, you need to go and turn this ad off, which is not ideal because this is a winning ad. This could probably hold $100,000 in spend. now you need to turn it off. And so you actually don't really have the capability to scale a lot of creative in fashion accounts if it is not built to be evergreen and run for an extended period of time. And so there is a lot of different elements that you need to introduce into creative in fashion that allows the ad to be scalable that allows you to run it for longer and that would even allow the introduction of a scaling campaign to be a possibility within the account structure. Now we'll dive into all of this when we talk about creative strategy. Then you have a retargeting 33:45 campaign. Typically these days this is just existing customer retargeting. Now website visitor retargeting will be done in your topfunnel campaigns anyway. So this is purely for isolating out existing customers showing them DPAs surfacing new arrivals in front of them so that we can continue to turn over returning customer revenue and have the budget delineated accordingly. As we move into 50 to 250k recommend multiple different advantage plus campaigns. Now, how you want to be thinking through the different advantage plus campaigns and how you want to be thinking through the ad structure is the same as how you would actually think through it in any other different business. And how that is is that at the campaign level, campaign level segmentation should be based on business units. And so if the business has fundamentally different units that it's KPIing on, it's looking at revenue separately, it's forecasting goals separately, then this needs to be introduced at the campaign level so that you can have the segmentation of budgets and KPIs. As an example, you may have all of the clothes within the fashion brand and then you may have denim. You 34:46 actually end up segmenting this out and looking at it as a separate business unit because it drives maybe 40% of revenue. It has maybe different LTV dynamics since you want to look at it as a different category entirely. And so because of that, you'll have a campaign for everything and then you'll have a campaign for denim and that'll be separated out. Same thing applies for maybe your basics. Okay? A lot of people don't push basics cuz they sell anyway, which is a good idea as we talked about earlier. You don't need to push stuff that's doing well organically, but if you do, you would have maybe basics in one campaign and then you would have all your seasonal products in another. And so you want to be splitting campaigns based on business units. When it comes to the adset level, you want to be splitting the adset level based on the question that you want the answer to. So the advantage of adset level structuring is that you can get feedback at the adset level on what's working and what's not. And so you might do adset level structuring based on format. So you have adsets with UGC in it and then you have adsets with campaign shoots. And the idea is that you want to be able to go 35:39 back to your seuite or your marketing your CMO or whoever's in the business and say hey look at this data UGC outperforms campaign shoots by 2x. Hence we should take some of the campaign shoot budget and we should redirect that into user generated content whatever it might be. Now do I think splitting by format is the best call? No. I actually don't think it's a very good idea at all. But if you need that data to be able to pass through to someone then it is a good call. You want to go collect that data, you want to structure like that at the adset level, then you can roll into a different adset structure over time as you want to answer different questions. So, I think one mistake or misconception that people have with adset level structuring is that they think that it has to be the same forever. Just like the campaign level structure has to be split by business units and don't touch it. That's how it is. But the adset level structure can change all the time. If you want to learn about formats, you split by formats. If you want to learn about concepts, you split by concepts. If you want to learn about the product level targeting, you split by products. 36:29 So this ends up being very accustom to the questions and feedback on data that you want answered within the business. And then as you move into 250k plus ad spend, all that occurs here is that just additional complexity likely exists within the business, which then translates into the account. And so the core difference between spending 50k a month and 250k a month isn't that you build out a more complex structure because of the level of spend. You actually build out a more complex structure because of the level of revenue in the business. because the revenue makes the business more complicated. And so we're a 50k a month fashion brand, we might just have 10 ads, 20 ads a week, plus there's not a huge wide product portfolio. Maybe they drop like 15 products every two weeks or something like that. Then once we go to this kind of ad spend, the brand is dropping weekly. It's 60 to 70 products and we're getting 200 new ads a week. And so because of how much additional complexity exists here, that needs to start getting mirrored within the account structure based on the business. One thing you want to be very careful of in fashion is DPA over reliance. We 37:31 actually have an entire YouTube video on this called something like DPA of the death spiral for fashion brands. And the reason is is that DPAs, in case you don't know what this is, this is dynamic product ad. It's those cataloges where each of the slides in the catalog is a dynamic product that's pulling through from your feed from the website. The idea is it will present the product that the person looked at on the website in the ad. So really good retargeting ad. Now, what will happen with DPAs is the rorowaz will be very good. And the rorowaz will be very good because it sits really far at the bottom of the funnel to where just before someone's about to buy the DPA comes in and serves them an ad. And so it often takes credit for a lot of purchases. So once you take view through conversions out of this and you just look at 7-day click, the rorowaz ends up dropping enormously, but it's still pretty good. Still pretty high. Then once you go to incremental attribution, the rorowaz here ends up being terrible comparative to the original number. And so most of the time you'll see your DPAs and you'll be like, "Oh, it's at a 7x or it's at a 10x." But 38:25 then if you went and delineated down to incremental attribution, the rorowise is probably closer to a two. Now, because most people don't do this, they end up substantially overspending on DPAs cuz they just put more and more and more budget hair because it looks good on the surface. And that's what you have to be really careful of. I have audited multiple fashion brands that have just looked at DPAs and gone, "Pas are incredible. Why are we even making more creative? Just put more spend behind DPAs. Put more spend behind DPA." So they actually decrease their creative volume. they end up putting more and more spend into DPAs. Issue is because DPA sit at the bottom of funnel, you aren't scaling the business because all of the new customer traffic that should be coming up here, you're actually taking budget away from it and moving it down to a stage in the funnel which is meant to convert this traffic. And so if you're not generating topunnel traffic or top ofunnel awareness in any way, you can't scale because the funnel isn't getting filled up, which is kind of 101 marketing, but because people are so obsessed with just distributing spend to the highest return on ad spend product, 39:17 they end up forgetting these things. So now account structure for Google number one the priority is to saturate Google shopping before you go into Google search. Reason being is that shopping ads show the product image and because fashion is very visual obviously the product photo matters more than anything else. It then shows the product price down here. It shows the product title, reviews, shipping and so the user ends up self-qualifying themsel before they even click on the ad. They also get five competitors next to your listing that they could also click on. So the fact that they ended up clicking on your listing self-qualifies them enormously. And so conversion rates end up being super high through clicks on shopping ad. Search ads on the other hand, you only get a few listings and it's text. Because once again, fashion is visual. What's text really going to do for selling me on the garment that I haven't even seen yet? And so search ads often end up substantially underperforming shopping. And for the brands that search campaigns do do very well on, it's normally because of the pre-existing brand recognition. Not to say this isn't 40:18 incremental, like you should run them if you can, if they're profitable. But for a lot of our clients that almost everyone knows in Australia, when you're searching for a dress and then their search ad pops up and then someone clicks and buys, they're not clicking and buying if they don't know who this person was. And so it's actually all of the existing brand awareness that even causes this ad to work in the first place. So if you're a small business, you definitely probably won't be able to see success with a search ad in fashion. Now the second thing here is feed optimization. This might be the largest needle mover when it comes to performance within shopping for fashion. So first big mistake is that most uh e-commerce websites in fashion have 9x6 imagery. 9x6 doesn't cleanly flow through into the feed. Google will autocrop it. Sometimes it doesn't do a very nice job of it. And so you want your images flowing through in one by one or 4x5. 4x5 is actually the preference these days so that it doesn't autocrop and it fits the feed nicely. Second thing is that you do want to always build be building contrast in some way on shopping. And so if you think through the shopping experience 41:18 when you go and search for something right now and you get that banner up the top, what draws your eye is often the listing that has contrast. And so if everything is just a white background of a product and then you have a model outside suddenly that will pull your attention. Now will it necessarily drive a higher conversion rate etc? Probably not. But if we're looking at just pre-click intent and we want to get as many clicks as possible and drive up clickthrough rate, we want to be building contrast in some way. And so often testing some kind of lifestyle imagery here, and you can do this just on select products and CTR goes up, will generally drive higher CTRs cuz we've ran this test quite a bit. So this is the image component. The next is titles. Most fashion brands will just pull in the default Shopify title, which will look something like this. It'll just be brand product title. You want to change this to a product title that is more descriptive. So rather than just because typically products are titled with some arbitrary name, you want to build the name out a little bit of more detail so that there's actual context being provided here. Then you want some kind 42:14 of feature of the product. Then you either want a colorway or a category in here. And then finally at the back you want the brand. This is immediately going to outperform this as more context is being provided to Google as to the actual keywords that this product should place on. Often these brand key terms get prioritized in like everyone's titles, but it restricts your cold key term discovery volume because Google will prioritize your quality or match scores against keywords based on how far forward they are in the titles. And so if you're using the most important real estate in the title on your brand name, what's the point, right? There's almost no point. You want it all the way at the back. The brand's already mentioned anyway in the shopping listing down the bottom of it. Next, images, titles, and this is in order of importance. We then have product type. So you just want your product type tagged up within the feed. And then the last down the bottom here is size curve. Now this is getting a little bit more complicated, but this is a really good little gem that you can apply, which is that you want dynamic feed rules so that when your highest 43:11 seller rate size, let's say that your highest seller rate size is a medium as an example, when this medium goes out of stock, this entire product gets pulled out of the feed, all the sizes. And the reason being is that the return on ad spend, the efficiency of this product through paid media once the primary size curve goes out of stock will drop precipitously, probably by like 50%. And so to avoid that decline from even occurring, let's just pull the product out of the feed the moment the highest sellrough rate size curves drop out. The third thing on account structure in Google is brand search. Now, this is primarily related to large retail fashion brands, which is that pretty much every single large retail fashion brand I've ever seen, which is a good probably 20 plus, they all overspend on brand search like crazy. Brand search just always, every single time, ends up taking up an enormous amount of spend irrespective of the fact that they have no competitors bidding on their branded search term. And so, just make sure that if you're in fashion, don't spend as much on brand because you don't need to. And then four, when it comes to structure and actually setting up the 44:10 account, it is a similar approach to meta, which is that you want to be splitting your campaigns based on business units. And the most important thing here is there just needs to be a very very good reason that you can steal man as to why the campaigns are structured in the way that they are. Because every time you segment campaigns in Google, you will decrease performance because you are segmenting out the conversion data and the campaigns work better when they have more conversion data to model against. And so how many campaigns you have is generally a product of your ad spend. If you're spending under 50k a month on Google, you probably don't want more than 3, four, five campaigns at a maximum. If you're spending way less than that, if you have a 10k budget, you ideally don't want more than two campaigns. And then obviously that flexes with scale. Now, it still always is the case, even if you're spending a million dollars a month, that less campaigns will generally yield better performance unless they're not aligned with the commercial objectives of the business. Now what segmentation will typically look like is by category and there's a few reasons why. Number one, categories 45:08 have different gross margin profiles. They also have different search volume and so they will have different limits of scalability on platform. Number two is just splitting by gross margin percentage if you want a better KPI and have different target return on ad spends across them. Number three is splitting new arrivals versus more of your evergreen products. And then number four is just having a bunch of campaigns that are super dynamic where you have like best sellers and then you're modulating against like zombie products or you can quite literally just title this grade A B C D inventory and have rules that are automatically moving products between here. So there's a lot of different options and it's going to be ultimately down to you. I can't just recommend and I never will recommend just one account structure that everyone should run because every fashion brand we work with has a slightly different structure based on their commercial objectives. Now we've touched on Meta and Google here. We can put a quick note on Tik Tok and Pinterest. On Tik Tok, Tik Tok is an incredible platform for a 46:11 few of the fashion brands that we work with. It is also a terrible platform for a few of the others. And the big decider on whether Tik Tok is going to work really well for you is going to be focus, but more so specifically focus on creative. And so if you have an incredible Tik Tok organic strategy, you have a lot of content going up. It's really good content. It's going to work organically. It's going to work on paid, you should be running Tik Tok ads. Super underlever, really good opportunity. If you don't have good native Tik Tok content that you're pumping out at volume, Tik Tok will not work for you. It will not be good because you need native content. you need a lot of it cuz it fatigues very quickly. So, this is really the core decider whether you run Tik Tok or not. Tik Tok, if you have all this, it's great. We've ran to date, I believe, five lift experiments on Tik Tok and four of them have been unbelievably positive. And that's fashion specifically. And then outside of fashion, we've ran another four inverse holdout tests and all of them have been terrible. And so, Tik Tok has shown pretty much no incrementality and we've pulled clients out of the platform 47:11 entirely. And so in fashion, it seems to be better from the data that we have and the lift tests that we've run. And then in conjunction to that, it will pretty much always perform as long as there's a really good creative organic strategy. Then when it comes to Pinterest, Pinterest is a really like tertiary channel. And just for the sake of this video, I'd recommend 99% of people just don't run it. Uh Pinterest also substantially overattributes like crazy because a view through conversion on Pinterest is very easy to get because if you open up Pinterest, right, you have all of these different tiles, you see like 10, I guess you call it pins all at once. And if one of these is an ad and then you buy from that brand within 24 hours, Pinterest claims a conversion. And so you end up with massive view through overattribution because it will just serve pins to anyone who's an existing website visitor. And then when that person inevitably goes and buys, Pinterest claims a conversion. And so when you look at click-through purchase value or click-through rorowaz on Pinterest, it ends up being way worse than what you actually think it is on the surface. And it's also generally not 48:10 a very scalable platform. And so when you try to push spend up, particularly in the Australian market, which is very small, uh you can't get much spend out of this platform at all. You can get like maybe $10,000 a month at a maximum in the Australian market. And the question becomes, do you want all the time, resourcing, and effort going into campaign builds and optimization on a platform that's only going to spend 10K a month when you could just go and drop an extra 10K into Meta and probably see a better incremental return and way better efficiencies and operating expenses and focus within the business. And I would always choose consolidation with the platforms that I'm advertising on. So, in our 3hour creative master class, we went through everything regarding creative strategy. So, I'd highly recommend you go and watch that video as well if you're interested in creative. In this video, we're going to be going through the specific nuances behind all of that creative strategy and how it changes inside of fashion. Now, one way that we ideulate creative is using what's called concepts. So, concepts is the intersection of an angle, an offer, and a persona. Now, 49:09 people often think that they can't build out concepts in fashion because we're talking to one persona, which is the target demographic of whoever the brand is. angle is here's clothes and then the offer is just the product. And so how do we actually use this concepting framework to be able to generate concepts within fashion? And so the offer is fairly obvious. This is just going to be the product. Now yes, this could be a discount or a bundle or some kind of gift with purchase, whatever you want it to be. I generally really don't like when fashion brands do that because they become very offer driven. And we actually internally uh when we're doing audits, we call this offerdriven fashion brands, which is that they're just always doing like a buy three t-shirts, get one free or like a gift with perses or some kind of bundle. And that's the only way that they keep the business aloat. These offer-driven fashion brands typically end up having really bad margin. I've seen a lot of their P&Ls and it's like 5 to 10% IBIDA is because they're super reliant on just always rotating through offers all of the time and that's the only reason they get people to buy and their LTV is horrific 50:09 because people are buying due to the offer. They're not buying due to the brand and the affinity that they want to make and so therefore it's very transactional becoming a loyal customer. So if you are an offer-driven fashion brand I'd kind of recommend trying to pivot out of it because I haven't seen that model do very well at scale. Now, when it comes to the persona, there is flexibility here and any large retail business will have four or five different personas built out that their four to five different customers. They give them names and they say, "This is who actually buys from us." This is effectively your persona breakout. So, if you're planning on working with us or if you're working with any agency, I'd strongly recommend that you give them this internal uh branding document that breaks out the personas cuz then when the agency or you internally are building out concepts, you can just build it out based on those personas that you've already built internally. And they're normally pretty in-depth anyway. If you don't have these or if you haven't built them, I strongly recommend doing it. Now, how you actually do this as an exercise, it's 51:02 probably a 20-minute tutorial in itself, but the quick TLDDR is that you want to survey your actual customers and you want to figure out, okay, who are all the people that are purchasing from us? Why are they purchasing from us? Where are they at their stage in life? Are they a trends setter or are they just hopping on translate? Like, what kind of person is this within fashion? And then how do we start to categorize them into multiple different groups? So, personas is straightforward. Offer is relatively straightforward and restrictive. And then we have the angle. Now, this ultimately comes down to how you are going to present the product and then also what problem you're going to agitate on and solve. And now, this doesn't have to be super feature- driven, but it needs to at least insinuate towards a feature. So, a creative that does incredibly well in fashion is something that accentuates a feature that is caused by the product. So, if the product cinches on your waist really well, if you can accentuate that within the actual video in the creative, then it ends up doing incredibly well because it's orientating around a 52:02 problem and it's presenting a really good solution. Another example of how to think through this very well is to think through a very specific situation that a customer will be in that we can speak to. So the angle might be that if you are a mom with age 10 years old and you want to have a work wear that also allows you to go straight from work to home to date night without ever having to change once. Well, this particular product is the solution to this situation that you'll be in. Now this situation probably a lot of people are in this to some capacity, right? People go from work and they go to date night and they have kids. So this is talking to a very specific person and we can obviously go more specific regarding the persona when we think through the language and framing here and this can be done through a piece of user generated content of this target demographic. Right? So you can start to script this out around I really wanted something where I could jump straight to work into date night cuz I didn't have enough time at home to get changed because blah blah blah blah blah blah. Therefore this product is so helpful in this particular circumstance. And that's 53:03 how you frame the entire created. Obviously, you don't just frame around this solution, but you frame around all of the benefits of that particular piece of clothing. And even better, if you want to increase the total addressable market and make it a more scalable ad, you rotate between a few different pieces or you sell a set as well. So rather than just selling, let's say, the dress, you're selling the dress plus a bag. And so when you start thinking through angles in more specificity like this, you'll start realizing that you can actually generate concepts in fashion at a very large scale. Okay, you can probably generate hundreds of these, then rotate them through all the different personas, then rotate them through tons of products. And this is one of your biggest benefits in concept generation in fashion is that the products are always rotating over and changing. And so, very quickly, throw 50 products in here as 50 different offers. Throw your personas. You might have six core personas. And then angles, go and ideulate on 50 angles. In fact, let's just cut that down. Let's say only 20 angles. Well, now all of a sudden, 20 * 50* 6. So, if you mix and match all of 53:59 these different options, you will have 6,000 concepts. All right, that is obviously crazy. This is enough concepts to get you 6,000 ads. And really, for each concept, you can make 10 to 20 ads per concept easily. And so, we're looking at like 60 to 120,000 ads off just sitting down, getting 50 products, getting your personas ready, and thinking of angles. And so, there should be no limit in terms of creative volume within fashion once you're approaching it through this framework. Now the question I get all the time is how should we think through the production split and honestly I don't think this is a great exercise because for every brand this is going to be very different and for some brands just based on performance data you want to lead into whatever is performing well however if I have to give percentage allocations campaign shoots which is like hi-fi production set at 25% of volume UGC and creator content sits at 40% of volume now this can include by the way like founderled content as well as EGC etc organic repurposing so taking organ organic content, repurposing it into ads sits at about 20%, and then we've got 54:59 statics sitting at about 15% of production. So, as a rough split, this is what you should be looking at. Obviously, these numbers are going to change brand to brand based on performance, based on what does well. Some people will zero this out entirely. Some people will bring this up a little bit, etc., etc. So, let's give a bunch of nuances on UGC and creators within fashion. Number one, fashion UGC does not need talking, which is honestly one of the huge benefits of it. So you actually do not need any voice. Some of the best performing UGC that we've actually had has not had any talking. This also has an added benefit that it becomes incredibly scalable globally because accents will restrict performance in foreign countries. If you don't have any talking, this becomes a very scalable asset. And so I recommend if you're getting UGC out of a creator, just get a non-talking version as well. It'll be easy to shoot. It'll be quicker. They just don't need to voice over. And it will give you a second asset that you can test, but also an asset that might be able to scale globally. the format close up to full body does incredibly well. So you start really close up to camera and then you 55:55 pull back. This is likely because it's an organic format that's translating well into paid right now. This might not be the case at the time that you're watching this video. I think the better thing to understand here rather than the fact that this is a format you should be testing is that formats will continue to rotate over time and you need to be on top of what formats are actually working organically and translating them into paid as well as you need to be testing new formats. If you want to be first to market on something new that's actually going to work. The only way that you do that is you test new formats. You generally want to add size data on the screen or on the primary text somewhere so that it reduces returns. You want to use trending audio obviously if you have the rights to don't want to claim being put on you. But this is incredibly effective and works well on Tik Tok. Uh Tik Tok did a wide meta analysis on this which they saw that performance was 30 to 40% better on all ads that had some kind of trending audio that was overlaid on the content. And that's obviously a product of the ad just feels more organic. The next is that you want to 56:53 show as many products as possible. And so the best way to do this normally is like a curated haul. And the reason being is that it makes the asset more scalable and it can last for longer. If you pay a UGC creator for a piece of UGC and there's just one product in it, when that product inevitably goes out of stock, you're dumb and you need to roll this ad out of the account and it's over. You're never going to use that piece of content again unless you restock that product next year. So instead, you always want to have multiple different products so that you can get more longevity out of the asset. So these are some good pointers when it comes to UGC creators. Two quick notes here, EGC and fitting room content. These are two really underutilized content types at the moment. EGC is employee generated content. You take staff members, they create in store content behind the scenes, etc. Feels really authentic. A lot of people are doing this and putting it onto Tik Tok, but they're not actually repurposing into ads. And then fitting room content is off the back of AGC, which is raw, authentic fitting room tryon content. Uh, this has done unbelievably well for 57:49 a couple Australian brands. It has allowed them to scale internationally. So, this is a format that is great. Ultimately, if we're talking about creative, we can't not mention the brand aesthetic versus direct response duality that exists within fashion, which is that you're going to have performance within an ad account sits somewhere here. But most teams pull too far into brand aesthetics or there's other people that pull way too hard into direct response to where it's probably damaging to the brand. This is rarer in fashion, at least with the large retailers that we work with. But I think the real key here is that you need to let the data feed into your decision-m. So, if we go all the way over to a brand that maybe sits here that's super direct response and has no brand aesthetics. So, let's say everything they run is like affiliate super scrappy UGC that's pushing heavy benefits and features of the product. That's fine. But because they're never investing any any like brand level production because they're not investing in any brand level production, it'll ultimately cap their brand perception to a degree because their brand is just all of this content 58:49 and the summation of it which is super features super features driven. On the other side of things, we have traditional retail businesses who haven't needed to run performance marketing based ads who are only just putting campaign shoots in their ad account. Now the issue is this stuff is not native at all to the platform and it doesn't convert anywhere near as well as this content converts. And so we need to find a middle ground ideally somewhere here where we have a combination of direct response advertising that stays on brand and the format doesn't infer the branding right so like you can stay on brand for something that's super premium like an example would be like Apple like Apple could run an ad that's super premium but it could be a piece of userenerated content as long as it's a little bit more polished and it stays within the brand guidelines. They don't have to just run campaign shoots over here. And honestly, it's fine to just not take my word for this and just stay over here and just keep pumping out campaign shoots all day long because the reality is is that anyone that actually gets to move themselves more into the the middle are the ones that'll actually 59:46 perform well on the platform and ultimately won't go under. And so you can stay over here all you want if you don't believe me and you don't think you need to move a little bit more towards direct response type marketing and advertising. Uh but this is ultimately how the platforms work. This is how they are rewarded. All the brands that we work with that are scaling the fastest are the ones that balance this duality really well where they can keep direct response marketing on brand and continue to pump out high volumes of content as well. A subcomponent of this brand versus performance argument and to actually give you something material to think about is the percentage of content that's between desirebased content and painointbased content. Most brands are weighted to about a 9010 and so 90% of their content will be desire aspirational content and then 10% will be painpoint driven. This mix should be a lot further towards 30 to 40% over here. The ad accounts that we're saying the best performance on lean further into painpointbased content. Now what's an actual example of this? Well, a hook here could be I never know what to wear to and then just put an occasion in 1:00:45 here. Or let me give you a gifting angle one which is my partner is impossible to buy for. These are opening with pain points and then obviously moving down the stages of awareness into selling. This will generally drive better performance in the platform and you can stay on brand particularly by you just run this stuff as partnership ads. So it doesn't even run through your handle. Due to the seasonal nature of fashion, creative planning is often done like 1.5 to 2.5 months out from the product being available. Now, one mistake I think a lot of people make within the seasonal rotation of creative inad accounts is that when all these new products come in, so there's a lot of newness, the old products, if they are still driving performance, now it might not be at a large spend level, but it might be efficient. We might be turning over stock. What will often happen is people will kill the old and they'll move all the spend into the new. This is a mistake because you end up just decreasing sellrough rates on these old products, which the seller rates on these products is only going to decline over time because they're going out of season. And so we actually want to 1:01:42 either maintain spend here or increase it to be able to sell through and then move on to new. Right? This is where inventory visibility once again becomes incredibly critical because if you are an agency with no visibility into inventory, with no visibility into any of the wider strategy, what do you do? And this is what I see in faction accounts all the time is just, oh, new stuff comes in, old stuff off, old stuff off, old stuff off. And then you just end up with turning off ads that were performing okay and turning over product and just rep prioritizing new. and you end up in this cyclical position continuously where you're just moving products to old and taking them out of the ad account despite the fact that we could keep spending on them and push through the remainder of the stock. Now, due to the way that this planning uh setup is structured as well, we want to be taking creative learnings and we want to be pushing them into future creative production so that we have these one to two month cycles of new content coming through that's based on the data from the last product drop. In some fashion brands, there's pretty much always some kind of tradeoffer going. So there's 1:02:36 some kind of discount, there's some kind of take a further off, etc. Um, with that, you want to be thinking about budget allocations across the ad account into these discounts. Generally, this is obviously going to be based on targets and budgets, etc. But we would generally like to cap this at 20 to 30% of budget so that we can maintain a 70 to 80% budget allocation into what I would call our evergreen campaigns that are going to continue to run and we're not disrupting performance here. All right. So, I want to talk about scaling internationally for a second. I want to give you how we've done this really effectively specifically for one brand and then all the cautionary tales around it. There won't be much drawing at this segment. I'll kind of just be walking you through our experience on international scale. So, the first one is that people try to scale internationally too quickly. If you're an Australianbased brand or if you're based in a country that's a similar population size to Australia, you really want to go to 10 million AUD a year before you even consider international expansion. Reason being is that anytime you expand internationally, you will 1:03:32 just increase the operational complexity of the business and you likely won't see as good results in the new country as you do in the primary market right now. So, you're just going to decrease efficiency for no reason when you can just do more scale locally. Another component of scaling fashion, I'll give you a case study here, is that I did an audit on a brand a while ago who was inhouse. So, I did it just out of goodwill cuz I really like the guys and they do about 10 to 20 million a year in Australia and New Zealand. And they were asking me, okay, we're planning for this US launch. We're thinking about all the operational logistics and should we have a separate ad account. How should we think through the paid strategy changing? And I said, guys, I've seen your ad accounts, right? You have like four to five elite ads that are evergreen that run all day long just on one or two SKs and they have spent in the Australian market. I think each of them had spent nearly a4 million dollars in lifetime spent. And I went, this is four to five actual winning ads that you can take and you can run them in any English-speaking international market and they will crush. If you have an ad 1:04:29 that's done that well in the Australian market, it will do well elsewhere. And I said just make sure you have a onetoone pricing strategy. So whatever your AUD pricing is, keep that number the same and just change it to USD. So if you're selling 70 AUD, you now sell 70 USD. So you get a margin expansion and you ride the 4x advantages here. And then they did it. They did it one to two months later. They launched into the US market. They saw better efficiency on their ads in the US than in AU because they had fatigued the AU market so heavily. And now the business has, I believe, nearly tripled and 50% of revenue comes from the US market, which is crazy. And the way that they were so successful there was because they had winning ads in the Australian market that had performed incredibly well that they could translate over. If they didn't have those winning creatives, the expansion wouldn't have worked. And I have seen so many brands try to expand to the US as a crutch to try to save Australia. But that is the wrong approach to going international. You do not go international to save the primary market. You need the primary market to be working. You need to have winners and 1:05:27 then you can translate it internationally. And the nice thing about fashion is you do have a structural advantage which is it's fairly easy to ship clothes internationally. Now when you are going to these international markets, there are a few considerations within fashion. Number one, this is a little bit of a hack. This might just be right now, might not apply into the future, but lowfi content performs better in the US in fashion accounts than it does in AU. So, if you're in fashion, you want lowfi content, at least in your mix when you do the US launch. If you're just like campaign shoots only, good luck. Number two is you want accent localization. So, unfortunately, Australian accents in videos don't do as well as they do in Australia in international markets like the US. Now, UK to AU does decently well. You can take these accents and run them in both countries and there's not much of a performance drop off, but there is a performance drop off. And so, ideally, if you want to maximize and keep performance where it is, you want the accents localized. And then the advantage obviously that you have here in fashion is that you actually uh don't 1:06:25 need audio running on the ad, right? In fashion, if you just have statics or you have GIFs or you have UGC with no talking overlay, you don't need this accent localization. You can just run stuff internationally. If we want to get more specific to US launches because I know a lot of my audience is in Australia and they're wanting to launch into the US as the primary market. Well, number one, keep your pricing one to one from AUD to USD. A lot of a big mistake that people will make is they'll decrease their US pricing substantially against Australian. So their $70 AUD, they'll convert that to like 52 USD, which is a big mistake. US dollar has higher purchasing power. You can actually get margin expansion in the US. Number two is you need catalog or product alignment, right? And so if you don't have dedicated buying for Northern Hem, well then you need the website to be filtered down to just products that are transseasonal. Otherwise, people will hit the website, they'll browse around, they'll see a bunch of products that have nothing to do with the season that they're in, and they'll bounce and conversion rates will be incredibly low. And so even though you might be driving 1:07:26 traffic to one particular product landing page that has a transseasonal product, if they then click out to the wider website, which they always do cuz they want to see the wider collection mix and these products aren't relevant to the season that they're in, you'll see much lower conversion rates. And then lastly, we have state selection. So this is going to be based on weather and it's going to be based on the demographic within the state. When you do a US launch, you do generally want to specify down to a particular state. States in the US are as big as the entire Australian population. So you don't have to worry about a TAM issue and this is just going to allow you to be more contextually relevant to meet the right audience where they are. Now there's a lot of different ways you can go about state selection and how to think about it. I will leave that for a separate video. Now before we go into the final section of the video wrapping everything together and giving you the playbook I want to talk about particularly omni channel brands that have retail uh presence and a measurement system called geolyft. Now the reason why this becomes extra applicable for omni or very large 9 1:08:23 figure retailers is because number one attribution becomes very unreliable once you achieve a large scale because you have so many different channels that are driving revenue that to understand the actual impact of meta is very difficult. Number two, when you have Omni, what you actually really want to understand is what is the impact of instore revenue against the media spend that we have across these platforms. And geo lift experiments is the best most applicable way to be able to do this. And so when it comes to test design in the US, you do this at a statebystate level and you use a clustering algorithm that takes all of your historical revenue and order data in each state and it clusters them together and pairs them based on the states that move together correctly. So what you end up seeing when you graph this in the pre-est design period is that let's say you select two states as the control and two states as the treatment. If you take these and you add them together and you look at revenue over time the control may look like this which for the sake of this let's call this maybe like Arizona and Texas. And then if you look at the treatment it may 1:09:20 look like this. So they move together. They're very tightly correlated over time. And this could be like LA plus maybe New York. And so the way that this works is that because these are tightly correlated, they can predict each other on any day in this past set of data, I could remove Arizona and Texas and I could look at just New York and LA and I would be able to predict with very high accuracy what the revenue is in these states because it's always like $100 lower or 95% of whatever the revenue level is here. And so what we then do is we go into one of these uh clusters. So we'll go into the treatment which is LA and New York. And maybe what we do is we go and introduce Tik Tok and we introduce Tik Tok at a 100K a month spend. Then through the treatment window what we want to see is does LA and New York suddenly diverge and then the difference in the divergence is obviously the lift that we've seen. Now the issue for my Australian audience is that state level targeting doesn't really work in Australia cuz there isn't enough state selection. And so you actually need to refine this down to commuting zones, which is relatively 1:10:22 self-explanatory in the language here, which is zones in which people commute in. And so we want to isolate areas in Australia where people stay within. So they work there and they live there. They don't cross borders. And then we do our lift tests at a commuting zone level. This gives us greater selection. We have about 60 plus commuting zones in Australia. And so we can do effectively the same thing as we do over here, but rather than doing it based on states, it's based on more regional areas. Now the added advantage of commuting zones in Australia with omni channel is that we can get more specific to stores. And so most uh large retail fashion brands will have a very high density of stores in like Vic. So there might be seven or eight stores in Vic. There might be seven or eight stores, let's say 10 in New South Wales, then you've got like six in Queensland. And then you have like one in Western Australia, one in South Australia, one in Tazzay, right? And so all the density is here. And so when you do a lift test at a state level like let's say in Vic, you have to measure revenue lift across all of these different stores which actually isn't super applicable because storebased 1:11:21 sellrough rates are going to be indicative of the product ranging and the season and you might have better performance in a particular state in a particular week because the product ranging is more conducive to the actual weather at the time. And so when you can pull down to a commuting zone level instead, commuting zones will typically only house one maybe two stores. And so you can more tightly measure revenue realization in the store against the spend increase in the platform. Now this doesn't just apply into Omni. We actually ran this uh for Cookie when we first took over and we're marketing into the US market which is direct to consumer only. There's no retail stores. The reason why we even ran this experiment was because they had a base level of revenue within this market that was being driven seem seemingly without any causal impact to ads. And so the ads just didn't seem very effective in driving revenue. And so therefore, we made an assumption that the ads probably weren't causal to revenue, at least in the way that they were being run at the time. And so we obviously restructured the account. And then before being confident in just arbitrarily increasing 1:12:22 budgets within the market, we put together state selection based on clustering. Then we did a large budget increase in one particular state. It actually wasn't multiple in this case. And then we measured the increase in revenue against the baseline revenue of the control. And what we saw was fortunately massive lift in the test state and so we proved causal impact of metas-pend into the region and that gave us the confidence to continue scaling the US market and we scaled the US very quickly. This then also applied into Tik Tok once we layered Tik Tok in. We obviously weren't confident at the beginning that we should rapidly increase Tik Tok in conjunction with the rapidly increasing spend in Meta. So to isolate the causal impact, we started running lift tests on Tik Tok as well to validate it as we continue to scale. All right. So now running through the playbook by spend. If you're spending between $30 to $75,000 a month in ad spend, you want to be running all your campaigns on 7-day click. You want to be using 180day altgic hack as the measure for whether you're in a good position or not. And you want this number to be between a two to a three. In terms of 1:13:22 structuring meta, you want just two to three campaigns. You want to be consolidating Australia and New Zealand. If you're an Australianbased brand, run them all in the same campaigns. Don't segment them out. And you want to be capping existing customer spend. On Google, you want shopping to be 80% plus of your budget. You want to be focusing on fixing your shopping feed. That's the highest leverage activity within Google for you. And then in terms of creative, you want 30 to 50 new ads a month. You want to be leveraging partnership ads. And you want 80% of your creative to be evergreen and 20% to be seasonal related. If you're spending 75k to 200k a month on measurement, you want to be using incremental attribution for being able to make decisions within meta. You also want to be leveraging lift studies, particularly if you're omni channel. You want to be using acquisition me and acquisition me adjusted to add back returns as a daily measurement of success. And you want to be looking closely at your cohort analysis to understand how repeat rates and return rates are changing over time to be able to layer that into your forecasting and your KPIs against paid media. On meta, 1:14:18 you want four to six campaigns. At the adset level, you want this to be split based on concept testing. You want your existing customer frequency to be capped at a seven. And you want your DPAs to be capped. This is the spend area where people start making the mistake of scaling up dynamic product ads. On Google, you can have a little bit more flexibility to other channels here now with shopping going down to 60 to 70%. And the big leverage here becomes size curve management. So making sure products are getting pulled out of the campaign if the core sizes go out of stock. Then in regards to creative, you want 65 to 200 plus creatives per month for this spend level. You want concept mapping. So all of your creatives are mapped against a particular concept that's been built up here. And then you want balance sheet. aka inventory visibility for the creative that you're producing to be able to turn over grade BCD inventory rather than just blindly making creative irrespective of the amount of inventory that we need to sell through across all of the different product portfolio. Ideally, your creative production here in terms of quantity one for one matches the amount 1:15:16 of inventory that you have under those SKs and then the SKs that obviously aren't moving, we increase creative production for them. on measurement at the 200k plus ad spend level. We want geolift testing in place for certain. We want omni channel dduplication. We want P&L reconciliation on a day-to-day and month-to-month basis. So all of our decisions within the ad account are reconciling up into P&L outcomes. And then we want to be tracking contribution margin on firsttime customers as well as existing customers to be able to once again see platform impact on this number. With regards to meta, the ad account quite frankly becomes complex at this level because at an ad account spending over 200k a month, there is likely complexity in the business, the revenue and the business units that exist. And so this needs to be translated into the ad account. What this actually looks like is going to be very custom brand to brand. You also want to be thinking about at this stage introducing Tik Tok if it is a viable channel for you and if you have the creative production to support on Google. you're now at the spend level where you actually can consider beginning going into YouTube as a more 1:16:13 top offunnel campaign. The issue with YouTube is measurability is very poor. And so you need the ability to run geolyft tests and you need the ability to allocate large budgets to it as a campaign for it to actually work which is why it's a viable campaign type at this level because at this level you should already be doing lift tests and you should already have a lot of ads and so because you have both of those things YouTube becomes a viable next channel in conjunction with Tik Tok to start continuing to scale. In regards to creative we want 200 plus ads a month there. And this is going to be indicative based on the expected value per ad. We have a creative calculator that allows you to actually calculate this. Reach out to us if you want to know your exact creative volume requirements. You want to make sure at least 10% of ad spend is going into production. This is where people start underweighting and not proportionally increasing creative production with ad spend. This needs to continue to go up and scale because the creative demands at this level of spend become really important. And then for scaling, you want to look at going international as 1:17:08 long as your localized revenue is above 10 million online. After working with so many fashion brands and continuing to audit fashion brands on a weekly basis, if I was to generalize a few core pillars of success that I see across the ones that do unbelievably well and are very profitable and growing and the ones that are in a very different position is the ones that are doing really well generally have an incredible ability to drive brand within the market and not need to discount products and not need to move a lot of products to discount. So they end up being the brands that build a reputation of not discounting, investing in brand perception and then using paid media to drive genuinely net new customers rather than recycling existing ones and overspending on their existing customer base. Now you would have noticed I didn't even mention the word AI in this entire video. And the reason for that is that we leverage AI enormously in every other category except for fashion created. And the reason for that is that if someone can't get clear visibility on exactly what the garment actually looks like in real life, then return rates end up shooting up. And so if you're going to use AI 1:18:08 generated content, you're often going to diverge from the reality of what the product looks like. And that becomes an issue when it's very visually driven rather than benefit driven like supplements are. So, as the very final section in this video, what I wanted to do was cut out to live ad breakdowns that I have done of multiple different fashion brands so you can get more of an intricate understanding of the tactical application into what makes a good fashion creative, what doesn't, and how you can go and translate that into your own brand. Before we cut out to those ad reviews, if you're a performance marketer and you've gotten this far in the video, please reach out to us at hiringbluensedigital.com.au. We are always hiring for A+ talent and we would love to have a chat about any opportunities that we currently have in the team. And if you are a brand and this was helpful to you, you feel it was very contextualized to fashion, then also feel free to reach out to us. There'll be a link in the description below to get a free audit. You need to be doing at least $5 million a year in revenue. And we need to have capacity currently to be able to actually do the 1:19:05 audit and take on more clients. But as long as those things are true, we'll be able to give you an in-depth road map on exactly how to apply everything that we've done in this video directly into your ad accounts. Zara's got 630 ads running, but there's still a lot of opportunity in their creative strategy. Right now, they have zero videos running. They have 26 images. They have nine carousels. They have about 300 dynamic creatives active. So, that probably has the videos in it. And then they have 200 DPAs. 200 DPAs. They've really weighted in there. I would probably be pulling down budget allocation to DPAs considering they have such high brand awareness and brand recognition. The DPAs are going to be overcrediting but not actually delivering an incremental impact at least to the point that they think. Now in the dynamic creatives they have 300 here. Normally you start running dynamic creatives because you've hit your page limit. I don't think they would have hit their page limit. About 630 ads normally you can go higher than this uh in the reported ad library before you hit a limit. And even so, worst case scenario, they could spin out pages for different 1:20:05 regions. Now, they're a very big business, so getting that over the line and actually approved is a different story. But going this hard into Dynamic Creatives just means that you're not collecting as much data on what's actually working and what's not. So, when you're looking at building creative feedback loops into the internal creative team or the agencies that they're using, it's going to add a little bit of complexity. They wait really hard into professional shoots. As you can see, pretty much all of the content here is all professional shoots. Either videos, either life style images, either direct product shots spun into carousels and DSAs. It's all very similar in actual content format and style. Obviously, the variation here is just the actual product and the people in the shoot. probably a very large opportunity tier to start to introduce more low-fi content, start to introduce partnership ads, start to bring in influencers if that's the direction that the brand wants to go. Because when you start talking about diversifying formats within creative types on a business is big, it really comes down to whether the 1:21:05 internal brand team is willing to make a bet like that. But it's pretty likely to improve performance just because they're really restricting their ability to have diverse content in the account. So, it's how do they start to introduce more creative types while still staying on brand and keeping the visual aesthetic consistent across every piece of content that hits the end consumer, which I think is more than achievable, right? Meshki does an incredible job at this. Cook eye does an incredible job at this. You could list a bunch of brands that have large diversity within the creative set that still stay on brand and keep consistency across all the creatives in terms of tone, in terms of visuals, whilst being able to drive further performance through the Meta account. White Fox Boutique only 42 ads running right now. Let's break down what they're doing well, but where there's a massive opportunity right now in their paid ad strategy. Now, they have a nice mix of hi-fi and lowfi content. So, you have hi-fi content here. You have a relatively lowfi content here. Issue is they have no partnership ads running, and they have a very limited amount of UGC or organic content running through 1:22:05 ads. Right now in fashion, partnership ads, organic style content is what's performing really well. then hopefully I don't get their agency fired or an in-house person in trouble here. But from what I can see, their Australian ads are driving to the UK website. You can see that right there, UK URL. And when I land on this, it wants to give me a redirect. Now, fortunately, only half their ads have that issue. The other half are working and they're driving to an Australian website on a collection page, which is good. The collection page is irrelevant. Last big opportunity missing from the current creative set is there's no audiobased hooks. You might think fashion really, do we want audiobased hooks in here? Surely that's not aligned with the category. It's very aligned with the category. All of the best performing ads within fashion are generally organic pieces of content run through partnership ads with relatively well-known influencers where there's a strong audiary hook that actually pulls people into want to watch the video. For a multi- nfigure business that probably spend a lot on meta at the moment, there's a lot of opportunity here. They're underweighted on userenerated 1:23:06 content. They're driving to the wrong landing pages. They don't have any audio hooks. and they have no partnership ads from what I can tell from the outside looking in running right now, which would be a huge unlock for them. Zo is doing a pretty good job right now in their ad library. Let's break down exactly why. Number one, they have 740 ads running, a lot of volume, 374 videos. They have a bunch of dynamic creative. This is probably because they're hitting up against their page limit. If it isn't and you're watching this Sabo, I would recommend leaning away from DCOS's because it just limits your ability to get data and continue to iterate creatively. Moving through the actual creative set. So they have a lot of lowfi shots here. They have a lot of UGC. They're obviously leveraging famous people on Instagram that are wearing their clothes. High production shoots. They're also got back in stock what I imagine is on their highest performing products and they're driving straight to the product pages. They're using audio hooks on a lot of their videos. This is actually underrated. A lot of faction accounts that I've taken a look at do not utilize audio at all. Potentially 1:24:00 people think it's off brand, but it's an easy way to get better performance through ads. When we look at landing pages, here's their top landing page. They're driving straight to this particular product. Must be a top performer. They're very So, they're going and leaning into it. They've then got a Valentine's Day landing page, which is great. They're leaning into this angle. And looks like they're going pretty hard on the US cuz third biggest landing page is the US and it's their top seller in Australia. This is generally the best way to crack into the US market as a fashion brand is that you take whatever your best sellers are in Australia and you translate them straight into the US. They generally translate pretty well as long as they're organically selling because it's actually a good product that people want. As we start to move through here, they then have a bridals collection, which is great. So, they've got collections based on specific events. So, it seems like an event heavy based business that then got more individual products. So, these I imagine would be more bestsellers and they're going very, very heavy at a product level. Now, do 1:24:48 they necessarily need to go this heavy at a product level in Australia? No. They probably have enough of a brand presence. They probably have enough of a following that they can go collectionbased. And this is generally what you see as you start to bridge into 8 fashion businesses in Australia. In the US, however, I really do like that they're leaning into individual product pages because you don't have a brand and so you need to crack the market and you need to crack the market through the best product that you currently have. Now, there's no partnership ads running. I say this in almost every real I make these days, but partnership ads really big opportunity. So, I would be leaning into that right now if I was in their internal marketing team. And then they could probably do some more instore stuff as well, considering that they do have a retail presence. actually leaning into in store content is generally a very easy quick win to be able to get a different content format into the current creative set. Country Road is a $1 billion business and they're currently missing the mark on Facebook. Firstly, only 160 ads live for a business that's doing a 1:25:38 billion dollars in revenue. Not a lot of creative volume at all. 12 videos, majority of them are DCOS, dynamic creative. You should not be running dynamic creative unless you are maxing out your page limit. They're obviously nowhere near that. So there's no reason why they're running that as a creative type. All it's going to do is limit the amount of learnings that they can actually get. Now let's take a look at the actual diversity set of their ads. So they have a bunch of spend and save. Then they have a bunch more spend and save. Then they have a bunch more spend and save. Then they've got a few videos in here. We can click play on one of them. 1:26:17 So there's a few things I do like about this. switching between a bunch of different products is really good for topfunnel. It makes the ad a lot more scalable because it obviously resonates with a larger audience. What I don't like about it is that it's the same kind of content type as everything else. It's just a professional hi-fi shoot. But let's continue to scroll through. We have a bunch of statics here from shoots. Let's click play on this one. Continue going through. So, it's all very, very similar content. Yes, they're different shoots. Yes, they're different products here. Okay, we've got a mixup. This looks to be an instore video, which would be great. >> Hi, I'm Leanne. Welcome to Country Road. Come with me. I'll show you some of our new collection. Something that I'm really excited about, our new gingham wrap jacket. This piece is really trans. >> Great. So, it looks like they are taking a little bit of inspiration from other retailers and having people walk through the stores and actually show the product. That's amazing. It's a really long piece as well, a minute and 52 seconds. So, it's good to see that they have that in there. As we continue to 1:27:19 scroll through, then it's just it's all the same stuff. So, there's really like no diversity in here whatsoever, except for that one walk through. Okay, we've got another walkthrough over here. Amazing. So, they're they're putting a little bit in. Then, they've just got statics with the sale amount over there, which I'm sure this is crushing for them, which is why they're probably putting a lot of spend in it. It's been active for a while, but it's because it's just basic sales messaging. And then we continue to scroll through and it's all kind of the same stuff over and over and over again. They're way underwrited on every other content type outside of hi-fi professional shoots. Now look at this. The top performing hook that's been live for 22 days. It is a piece of user generated content. >> Okay, Country Road has just released their autumn winter homeware collection. So come with me and check it all out. >> Amazing. So triple down here. They should be launching way more of this. They should also be running it as partnership ads. They shouldn't be running this through the primary page. And then lastly, there's a very low volume of ads going live. They have 1:28:14 about 10 ads going live every 3 to 4 days. Not a lot at all for the size of this business. I love ugly. 110 ads running. What are they doing well? Where's this opportunity for improvement? 30 videos running, three images. They're heavily leaning into DCO's dynamic creative. This would be because they're coming up against the page limit on their ad account. They have no DPAs running, which I love. That's nice. They could probably put one in, but none is better than hundreds. In terms of the actual content that they're running, they're leaning heavily into partnership ads, which is amazing. This is a huge opportunity right now. I've been reviewing a lot of fashion brands ad libraries, and most people aren't leaning into them. They had to shut down the US due to tariffs, but they've recently fixed that. So, they're notifying everyone in their creatives that you can now shop tariffree. Where is their opportunity right now? There's not much lowfi content in here. All of it is really high production, as you can see. if I stop anywhere. All very high production stuff, high production shoots, very clean text over the top. I really like the content, but nothing is 1:29:10 feeling very organic. Now, there's obviously the partnership ads that feel a little bit organic. We can watch this one right here. 1:29:27 I don't mind it. Once again though, it's very much so within the bounds of the content style that they're trying to maintain across all of the ads. Here's another one that looks a little bit more lowfi. 1:29:44 So this would be a really interesting one to know performance and understand how this is standing out from the rest. To be fair, if we sort by the oldest running ads, so these are the ads that have run the longest ever in this ad account. This one for example, ran for nearly 3 years. They are all this style. So it doesn't seem like they have had great success if they have done testing of lowfi more organic based content because all of their long-standing content has been all of these high production shoots with offers on them. I think one opportunity is they're not using any auditory hooks on any creative. So that's something that they could look into, but that generally lends itself to lowfi content. Then with regards to landing pages, they're going to collections, which is exactly what we do 80% of the time. the top collection being active wear, which is really interesting. This seems to be an up andcoming category for them that they're leaning into, particularly with partnership ads, too. So, I think active wear can lend itself a little bit more towards creating more organic content and introducing that into the account. So that's probably a pillow that I'll be trying separated
