- Client
- Mamin Dim
- Industry
- Baby & Children’s Retail
- Market
- Ukraine
- Timeline
- April–May 2026
- Services
-
- Google Ads
- Search
- Performance Max
- Online & Offline Campaign Optimization
Project overview
The client is a baby and children’s retailer with an established eCommerce business and a network of physical stores across Ukraine.
Google Ads was already generating sales, but the client wanted more from the existing budget. The goal was to increase online revenue while also driving more customers to physical stores, without increasing ad spend.
Our review of the account showed that the problem was not a lack of campaigns. The account had too many overlapping elements: a brand Search campaign with 132 keywords, multiple Performance Max campaigns, mixed conversion objectives, and products with very different levels of relevance and performance.
We simplified the structure, separated online sales from store-focused activity, and moved budget toward the campaigns and products already showing stronger results.
From April to May, revenue increased by 47.17% with no increase in ad spend. At the same time, CPA decreased by 11% and directions to physical stores increased by 29.6%.
The starting point
An active account with too many competing priorities
The account had enough historical data to show what was working, but its structure made that information difficult to act on.
-
132 keywords in the brand campaign
The brand Search campaign contained 132 keywords. Many were unnecessary for a campaign whose main job was to capture high-intent brand searches and convert them efficiently.
-
Overlapping Performance Max campaigns
Multiple PMax campaigns were running with overlapping structures. Budget was being distributed across campaigns without a clear enough distinction between their roles.
-
Online and offline goals in the same setup
The business needed Google Ads to support both eCommerce sales and its physical store network. These objectives required different conversion signals, but the existing structure did not separate them clearly enough.
-
Products with very different sales potential
Performance Max included seasonal and lower-converting products alongside stronger performers, giving the campaigns little distinction between products that deserved more investment and those that did not.
The first priority was therefore to make the existing account more focused before making any decision about additional spend.
What success had to look like
The budget was not increasing, so the account had to produce more from the same level of investment.
We set three priorities:
-
Increase online revenue
Generate more sales without increasing the overall Google Ads budget.
-
Reduce CPA
Revenue growth needed to come with more efficient customer acquisition, not simply more expensive conversions.
-
Drive more customers to physical stores
Google Ads also needed to contribute to the retailer’s offline business by increasing store-direction actions.
This gave us a clear basis for deciding what to keep, what to remove, and where the existing budget should go.
Approach
Give each part of the account a clear job
We started with the brand Search campaign.
Of the 132 existing keywords, we retained 5 brand terms that were relevant to the campaign’s conversion objective. We also rewrote the ads and removed competing campaign goals so the campaign could focus on conversions.
Performance Max required a different type of cleanup. We removed duplicate and underperforming campaigns, reviewed product performance, and excluded seasonally irrelevant and lower-converting items.
We then separated the two main business objectives. Campaigns responsible for eCommerce sales were optimized for purchases, while activity supporting the physical stores focused on offline actions.
The budget itself did not increase. We changed where it was being spent.
What we changed
-
132 → 5 brand keywords
We reduced the brand Search campaign from 132 keywords to 5 relevant brand terms.
Ad copy was rewritten with clearer USPs and calls to action, and the campaign was focused on conversions rather than multiple objectives.
-
A simpler Performance Max structure
Duplicate and underperforming PMax campaigns were removed.
Instead of continuing to divide budget across overlapping campaigns, we kept the structure that had already demonstrated stronger performance and concentrated investment there.
-
Product selection based on relevance and performance
We reviewed which products were being advertised through Performance Max and excluded seasonally irrelevant and lower-converting items.
Asset groups were also updated with new imagery, descriptions, and copy.
This meant that the budget was no longer distributed broadly across products with very different sales potential.
-
Separate objectives for eCommerce and physical stores
We separated campaigns according to what they were expected to achieve.
Online campaigns focused on purchases. Store-focused activity was optimized around offline actions.
This gave the account a clearer distinction between activity responsible for eCommerce revenue and activity supporting the physical retail network.
Results
-
+47.17%
Revenue
Revenue increased by 47.17% from April to May while the overall advertising budget remained unchanged.
More revenue · same ad spend
-
−11%
CPA
Cost per acquisition decreased by 11% over the same period.
Lower cost per acquisition
-
+29.6%
Directions to stores
Directions to the client’s physical stores increased by 29.6%.
Higher offline store intent
-
0%
Increase in ad spend
The revenue increase was achieved without increasing the overall Google Ads budget.
+47.17% revenue · 0% additional spend
