Google Adult is 15.2% of the leads and 15.8% of the spend, but 1.9% of the bookings.
1,232 Google Adult leads cost $25,872 and produced 4 bookings. 31.2% of them were removed before anyone could work them, against 8.9% on Meta.
At Meta's own observed rate of $735.48 a booking, that same $25,872 would have bought roughly 35 bookings instead of 4. That is the ask for Hash: either the Google Adult removal rate comes down, or the budget moves.
Not a forecast — it is $25,872 divided by the Meta cost per booking already in the table below, both measured over the same ten days.
| Platform | Leads | Removed | Distributable | Booked | Spend | Cost / lead | Cost / distributable | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meta | 6,285 | 558 8.9% | 5,624 89.5% | 188 3.3% | $138,270 | $22.00 | $24.59 | $735.48 |
| Google Adult | 1,232 | 384 31.2% | 848 68.8% | 4 0.5% | $25,872 | $21.00 | $30.51 | $6,468.00 |
| Google Child | 2 | 0 0.0% | 2 100.0% | 0 0.0% | $44 | $22.00 | $22.00 | — |
| Snapchat no price given | 583 | 60 10.3% | 521 89.4% | 14 2.7% | not priced | — | — | — |
% under Removed is of leads received · % under Distributable is of leads received · % under Booked is of distributable leads, which is the conversion rate a collector is actually judged on.
| Family | Platform | Leads | Removed | Distributable | Booked | Spend | Cost / lead | Cost / distributable | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kids Meta (Insta/FB) #…KIDSX | Meta | 2,988 | 123 4.1% | 2,829 94.7% | 89 3.1% | $65,736 | $22.00 | $23.24 | $738.61 |
| Kids Google PMax #…KPX | Google Child | 2 | 0 0.0% | 2 100.0% part | 0 0.0% | $44 | $22.00 | $22.00 | — |
| Adult Meta (Instagram) #…1FX | Meta | 3,297 | 435 13.2% | 2,795 84.8% | 99 3.5% | $72,534 | $22.00 | $25.95 | $732.67 |
| Adult Snapchat #…SNAP | Snapchat no price | 583 | 60 10.3% | 521 89.4% | 14 2.7% | not priced | — | — | — |
| Adult Google #…GX | Google Adult | 606 | 188 31.0% | 418 69.0% part | 2 0.5% | $12,726 | $21.00 | $30.44 | $6,363.00 |
| Adult Google Demand Gen #…DX | Google Adult | 597 | 182 30.5% | 415 69.5% part | 2 0.5% | $12,537 | $21.00 | $30.21 | $6,268.50 |
| Adult Google PMax #…PX | Google Adult | 29 | 14 48.3% | 15 51.7% part | 0 0.0% | $609 | $21.00 | $40.60 | — |
part = the sheet carries no duplicate or rejected column for that family, so its distributable count is an over-statement and its cost per distributable lead is a floor.
Whole period, 2026-04 → 2026-09, measured out of our own CRM feeds. Bookings observed to 2026-08-31. August is excluded from every booking rate — it is still maturing.
$2,251,828 bought 102,985 leads. 15.3% were removed, 2.5% were duplicates and 4.5% were rejected, leaving 80,039 (77.7%) that a collector could actually work — and $501,728 paid for leads nobody could work.
Mike's sheet covers ten days. On its own it cannot tell you whether a 31% Google removal rate is a bad fortnight or the normal state of things. Measured across every month each family has run, out of our own CRM rather than the supplied sheet, it is the normal state of things — and the two halves have moved in opposite directions.
Meta has got steadily better. Kids Meta removals went 15.5% → 14.7% → 12.7% → 8.3% → 4.3% from April to August. Adult Meta and Snapchat improved too. Whatever Hash changed on the Meta side has worked.
Google has not. Kids Google removals went the other way — 25.5% → 28.8% → 36.0%. Adult Google has sat at 25–30% every single month. Kids Demand Gen, the newest thing, opened at 38.0%, the worst figure on the page.
Over the whole history: Kids Meta (Insta/FB) costs $291.13 a booking and Kids Google costs $893.42 — the same product, the same $22.00 a lead, 3.1× the price per booking. On the adult side $277.19 against $838.35.
| Family | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / lead | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 51,092 | 10.9% | 1.8% | 4.5% | 42,298 82.8% | $22.00 | $26.57 | 7.6% | $291.13 |
| Kids Google PMax | 16 | 6.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 15 93.8% | $22.00 | $23.47 | maturing | — |
| Kids Google Demand Gen | 129 | 38.0% | 0.0% | 3.9% | 75 58.1% | $22.00 | $37.84 | maturing | — |
| Kids Google | 11,091 | 28.2% | 2.2% | 5.1% | 7,151 64.5% | $22.00 | $34.12 | 2.5% | $893.42 |
| Adult Meta (Instagram) | 18,974 | 12.5% | 3.8% | 3.4% | 15,226 80.2% | $22.00 | $27.42 | 7.9% | $277.19 |
| Adult Snapchat | 7,841 | 10.0% | 3.5% | 4.6% | 6,421 81.9% | $22.00 | $26.87 | 5.6% | $390.03 |
| Adult Google | 9,542 | 26.9% | 3.7% | 4.7% | 6,176 64.7% | $21.00 | $32.45 | 2.5% | $838.35 |
| Adult Google Demand Gen | 1,136 | 26.8% | 0.4% | 3.9% | 783 68.9% | $21.00 | $30.47 | maturing | — |
| Adult Google PMax | 3,164 | 32.7% | 0.6% | 6.8% | 1,894 59.9% | $21.00 | $35.08 | 1.6% | $1,290.88 |
Each lead is counted against at most one loss, in the canonical order dupe → removed → rejected, so the columns do not double-count. A dupe is a re-hit within 15 days, matched across all suppliers. Out-of-area is not available in this feed, so distributable is an upper bound here exactly as it is on Mike's sheet. Booking rate and cost per booking use only months old enough to judge (20+ days); August is still maturing and is excluded from them. Recycled piles and R-suffix re-works are excluded throughout. Bookings observed to 2026-08-31.
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04 | 5,990 | 928 15.5% | 137 2.3% | 569 9.5% | 4,356 72.7% | $30.25 | 7.8% | $280.38 |
| 2026-05 | 13,080 | 1,929 14.7% | 228 1.7% | 747 5.7% | 10,176 77.8% | $28.28 | 7.7% | $285.48 |
| 2026-06 | 11,187 | 1,423 12.7% | 285 2.5% | 423 3.8% | 9,056 81.0% | $27.18 | 7.4% | $296.88 |
| 2026-07 | 9,509 | 791 8.3% | 230 2.4% | 283 3.0% | 8,205 86.3% | $25.50 | 7.3% | $299.71 |
| 2026-08 | 11,311 | 482 4.3% | 59 0.5% | 280 2.5% | 10,490 92.7% | $23.72 | still maturing | — |
| 2026-09 | 15 | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 15 100.0% | $22.00 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08 | 16 | 1 6.3% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 15 93.8% | $23.47 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08 | 129 | 49 38.0% | 0 0.0% | 5 3.9% | 75 58.1% | $37.84 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06 | 3,260 | 831 25.5% | 71 2.2% | 155 4.8% | 2,203 67.6% | $32.56 | 4.0% | $543.33 |
| 2026-07 | 7,258 | 2,090 28.8% | 170 2.3% | 375 5.2% | 4,623 63.7% | $34.54 | 1.7% | $1,257.29 |
| 2026-08 | 573 | 206 36.0% | 5 0.9% | 37 6.5% | 325 56.7% | $38.79 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05 | 3,647 | 553 15.2% | 194 5.3% | 200 5.5% | 2,700 74.0% | $29.72 | 7.9% | $279.56 |
| 2026-06 | 3,842 | 444 11.6% | 201 5.2% | 156 4.1% | 3,041 79.2% | $27.79 | 9.0% | $245.00 |
| 2026-07 | 4,682 | 567 12.1% | 186 4.0% | 142 3.0% | 3,787 80.9% | $27.20 | 7.1% | $308.40 |
| 2026-08 | 6,768 | 817 12.1% | 137 2.0% | 151 2.2% | 5,663 83.7% | $26.29 | still maturing | — |
| 2026-09 | 35 | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 35 100.0% | $22.00 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05 | 870 | 112 12.9% | 38 4.4% | 54 6.2% | 666 76.6% | $28.74 | 3.9% | $562.94 |
| 2026-06 | 2,322 | 229 9.9% | 122 5.3% | 151 6.5% | 1,820 78.4% | $28.07 | 6.6% | $331.71 |
| 2026-07 | 2,428 | 274 11.3% | 86 3.5% | 109 4.5% | 1,959 80.7% | $27.27 | 5.3% | $414.08 |
| 2026-08 | 2,213 | 168 7.6% | 31 1.4% | 46 2.1% | 1,968 88.9% | $24.74 | still maturing | — |
| 2026-09 | 8 | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 8 100.0% | $22.00 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06 | 3,173 | 945 29.8% | 112 3.5% | 161 5.1% | 1,955 61.6% | $34.08 | 2.3% | $900.45 |
| 2026-07 | 3,933 | 1,005 25.6% | 212 5.4% | 177 4.5% | 2,539 64.6% | $32.53 | 2.6% | $794.16 |
| 2026-08 | 2,431 | 618 25.4% | 30 1.2% | 106 4.4% | 1,677 69.0% | $30.44 | still maturing | — |
| 2026-09 | 5 | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 5 100.0% | $21.00 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08 | 1,134 | 305 26.9% | 4 0.4% | 44 3.9% | 781 68.9% | $30.49 | still maturing | — |
| 2026-09 | 2 | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 2 100.0% | $21.00 | still maturing | — |
| Month | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Cost / distributable | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07 | 3,135 | 1,033 33.0% | 14 0.4% | 214 6.8% | 1,874 59.8% | $35.13 | 1.6% | $1,290.88 |
| 2026-08 | 26 | 3 11.5% | 5 19.2% | 1 3.8% | 17 65.4% | $32.12 | still maturing | — |
| 2026-09 | 3 | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 0 0.0% | 3 100.0% | $21.00 | still maturing | — |
Cost per booking is just cost per lead ÷ booking rate, so the answer turns entirely on which booking rate you use. Mike's 21–30 Aug sheet is a 1–10 day old cohort with roughly a third of its bookings still to land, and dividing by that inflates every family — unevenly, depending on whether a family's leads happened to arrive early or late in the window. That would make PMax look bad, or good, on nothing but the calendar.
So this table takes the booking rate from a settled July cohort (2026-07-01 → 2026-07-31, observed to 2026-08-31 — 28 to 58 days old, well past the 20-day bar) and applies today's prices to it. Recycled piles and R-suffix re-works are out of every denominator.
| Family | Supplier | Leads | Booked | Booking rate | Cost / lead | Cost / booking | vs best |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alan — Google (3CX) stale price | Alan | 2,579 | 172 | 6.67% | $15.86 | $237.86 | 1.0× |
| Adult Meta (Instagram) | Blue Rooms | 4,682 | 334 | 7.13% | $17.28 | $242.23 | 1.0× |
| Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | Blue Rooms | 9,509 | 698 | 7.34% | $22.26 | $303.25 | 1.3× |
| Lead Pronto | Lead Pronto | 6,444 | 310 | 4.81% | $15.81 | $328.66 | 1.4× |
| Adult Snapchat | Blue Rooms | 2,428 | 129 | 5.31% | $26.43 | $497.46 | 2.1× |
| Alan — everything else stale price | Alan | 5,207 | 148 | 2.84% | $15.86 | $558.13 | 2.3× |
| Adult Google | Blue Rooms | 3,933 | 104 | 2.64% | $18.40 | $695.84 | 2.9× |
| Kids Google | Blue Rooms | 7,258 | 127 | 1.75% | $22.26 | $1,272.15 | 5.3× |
| Adult Google PMax | Blue Rooms | 3,135 | 51 | 1.63% | $27.85 | $1,711.96 | 7.2× |
| Adult Google Demand Gen provisional | Blue Rooms | 1,122 | 7 | 0.83% | $26.37 | $3,176.05 | 13.4× |
| Organic (website) | Organic | 395 | 26 | 6.58% | no price | — | — |
assumed price — Snapchat was not in Mike's email; Neil's instruction was to use the Meta $22.00. Our own per-campaign spend for 7 Apr–29 Jun had Snap at $13.40 against adult Meta's $9.35, ~43% higher, so if that ratio still holds Snap's real price is nearer $31 and its cost per booking is understated here by about a third. · stale price — Alan's cost sheet stops in June; the supplier cost logins lapsed ~23 Jul and only Neil can restore them. · provisional — Demand Gen did not exist in July, so it has no settled cohort; its rate is the maturity-corrected August estimate off a handful of bookings. Treat it as a direction, not a number. · Organic carries no price because it has no media cost.
Delivering 2,904 a week against 3,200 needed — which looks like a 9% miss, and that number is worthless. A Florida lead cannot be shot in Orlando. Counting only the areas that are actually short, the gap is — a week, while — a week is stranded in two cities already over target.
Only two of eight areas hit 400, and they overshoot badly — Florida at 193% and New York at 158%. Every other area has hit 400 in at most one week out of 21; Dallas and Nashville have never done it once.
Orlando is 44% of the entire shortfall on its own — the full 400, because it has never run a kids Meta campaign at all.
And the allocation is upside down. The two areas we oversupply convert worst — Florida 6.32%, $348 a booking. The areas we starve convert best — Boston 9.94% at $221 and Nashville 9.10% at $242, running at 95% and 62% of target. We are buying the most of our most expensive bookings and the least of our cheapest.
| Area | Last 4 avg | Last 8 avg | % of 400 | Short / wk | Surplus / wk | Weeks at target | Booking rate | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boston | 382 | 314 | 95% | — | — | 1 of 21 | 9.94% | $297.69 |
| Chicago | 320 | 288 | 80% | — | — | 1 of 21 | 7.00% | $376.31 |
| Dallas | 312 | 242 | 78% | — | — | 0 of 21 | 7.08% | $292.81 |
| Florida | 772 | 775 | 96% | — | — | 10 of 21 | 6.37% | $313.94 |
| Houston | 240 | 232 | 60% | — | — | 7 of 21 | 6.37% | $284.47 |
| Nashville | 246 | 221 | 62% | — | — | 0 of 21 | 8.98% | $481.63 |
| New York | 632 | 421 | 158% | — | — | 11 of 21 | 8.25% | $169.75 |
| TOTAL 7 areas | 2,904 | — | 91% | — | +— | — | — | — |
Booking rate and cost per booking are the settled July cohort at $22 — the same basis as the True cost per booking tab, not the immature 21–30 Aug window. Short and Surplus are never netted against each other, because volume in one city does nothing for a deficit in another.
On the evidence, yes — and it is near its all-time peak right now. The last four full weeks averaged 2,902 kids leads a week against 2,085 for the four before that, a +39% recovery. The dip was July, not now. Peak week remains 2026-05-22 at 3,462.
52,021 fresh Meta kids leads since 2026-04-03, plus 487 recycled re-works which are excluded.
The real headroom is Orlando. It has never run a kids Meta campaign — not one lead, ever — while it does run adult Meta, Snapchat and Google, and takes Google kids instead. Kids Meta is the best product we buy; Google kids is one of the worst. Switching Orlando on is the most obvious place to find more volume before anyone concludes Meta cannot supply it.
Meta only (#…KIDSX). Google kids — KX, KPX,
KDX — is deliberately excluded: it is a different product at a different price converting at a
quarter of the rate, and blending it would answer a question about Meta with volume Meta never delivered.
Weeks run Friday → Thursday, the same boundary as Lead Flow and the Blue Rooms CPL
reconciliation. Data through 2026-09-02.
| Week (Fri → Thu) | Boston | Chicago | Dallas | Florida | Houston | Nashville | New York | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-03 → 2026-04-09 | 196 | · | · | 128 | · | · | · | 324 |
| 2026-04-10 → 2026-04-16 | 106 | 209 | 131 | 350 | 223 | 136 | 213 | 1,368 |
| 2026-04-17 → 2026-04-23 | 144 | 192 | 142 | 379 | 306 | 126 | 259 | 1,548 |
| 2026-04-24 → 2026-04-30 | 304 | 326 | 238 | 628 | 494 | 225 | 535 | 2,750 |
| 2026-05-01 → 2026-05-07 | 267 | 377 | 321 | 626 | 512 | 160 | 482 | 2,745 |
| 2026-05-08 → 2026-05-14 | 233 | 269 | 252 | 766 | 414 | 180 | 500 | 2,614 |
| 2026-05-15 → 2026-05-21 | 303 | 174 | 123 | 1,134 | 402 | 126 | 659 | 2,921 |
| 2026-05-22 → 2026-05-28 | 353 | 186 | 139 | 1,257 | 396 | 268 | 863 | 3,462 |
| 2026-05-29 → 2026-06-04 | 338 | 170 | 146 | 1,171 | 439 | 234 | 417 | 2,915 |
| 2026-06-05 → 2026-06-11 | 282 | 318 | 219 | 1,146 | 570 | 227 | 396 | 3,158 |
| 2026-06-12 → 2026-06-18 | 238 | 319 | 126 | 889 | 308 | 179 | 376 | 2,435 |
| 2026-06-19 → 2026-06-25 | 237 | 285 | 140 | 837 | 440 | 165 | 481 | 2,585 |
| 2026-06-26 → 2026-07-02 | 219 | 327 | 165 | 798 | 301 | 123 | 92 | 2,025 |
| 2026-07-03 → 2026-07-09 | 240 | 350 | 162 | 976 | 342 | 245 | 228 | 2,543 |
| 2026-07-10 → 2026-07-16 | 192 | 207 | 105 | 771 | 194 | 165 | 153 | 1,787 |
| 2026-07-17 → 2026-07-23 | 237 | 226 | 203 | 685 | 179 | 175 | 192 | 1,897 |
| 2026-07-24 → 2026-07-30 | 316 | 242 | 222 | 684 | 183 | 200 | 265 | 2,112 |
| 2026-07-31 → 2026-08-06 | 625 | 472 | 233 | 823 | 247 | 290 | 537 | 3,227 |
| 2026-08-07 → 2026-08-13 | 374 | 308 | 303 | 842 | 268 | 253 | 711 | 3,059 |
| 2026-08-14 → 2026-08-20 | 377 | 249 | 340 | 852 | 309 | 266 | 728 | 3,121 |
| 2026-08-21 → 2026-08-27 | 151 | 249 | 370 | 569 | 137 | 175 | 551 | 2,202 |
| 2026-08-28 → 2026-09-03 part week | 30 | 54 | 222 | 352 | 118 | 66 | 381 | 1,223 |
| TOTAL | 5,762 | 5,509 | 4,302 | 16,663 | 6,782 | 3,984 | 9,019 | 52,021 |
A lead booked on day 5 has not booked yet on day 2. Our own ROI code refuses to judge a lead until it is 20 days old. Plotting the raw rate by fortnight therefore draws a smooth "decline" at the recent end that is pure measurement artefact — and a test that has simply not landed yet reads as a test that failed.
So each fortnight shows two numbers. Visible rate is bookings matched so far ÷ leads — honest, but younger cohorts read low and are greyed out. Settled estimate divides that by the share of eventual bookings a cohort of exactly this age spread would be expected to show, from a lag curve measured on real settled cohorts (2026-04-01 → 2026-06-15). Only the settled column is comparable across fortnights. The ×N beside it is how big that correction is — the bigger it is, the more estimate and the less measurement.
Bookings observed to 2026-08-28 — the newest booking the CRM extract actually contains, not today. Recycled and R-suffix codes are excluded from every denominator.
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-28 → 2026-04-10 | 433 | 26 | 6.00% | 6.00% | settled |
| 2026-04-11 → 2026-04-24 | 3,150 | 234 | 7.43% | 7.43% | settled |
| 2026-04-25 → 2026-05-08 | 5,475 | 439 | 8.02% | 8.03% | settled |
| 2026-05-09 → 2026-05-22 | 5,641 | 466 | 8.26% | 8.28% | settled |
| 2026-05-23 → 2026-06-05 | 6,447 | 461 | 7.15% | 7.18% | settled |
| 2026-06-06 → 2026-06-19 | 5,496 | 421 | 7.66% | 7.72% | settled |
| 2026-06-20 → 2026-07-03 | 4,484 | 316 | 7.05% | 7.14% | settled |
| 2026-07-04 → 2026-07-17 | 4,311 | 308 | 7.14% | 7.31% | settled |
| 2026-07-18 → 2026-07-31 | 4,329 | 335 | 7.74% | 8.08% | settled |
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 6,136 | 412 | 6.71% | 7.32% ×1.09 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 5,163 | 262 | 5.07% | 8.03% ×1.58 | still landing |
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-25 → 2026-05-08 | 745 | 48 | 6.44% | 6.44% | settled |
| 2026-05-09 → 2026-05-22 | 1,515 | 129 | 8.51% | 8.53% | settled |
| 2026-05-23 → 2026-06-05 | 2,218 | 183 | 8.25% | 8.28% | settled |
| 2026-06-06 → 2026-06-19 | 1,893 | 165 | 8.72% | 8.75% | settled |
| 2026-06-20 → 2026-07-03 | 1,423 | 127 | 8.92% | 8.96% | settled |
| 2026-07-04 → 2026-07-17 | 1,597 | 115 | 7.20% | 7.31% | settled |
| 2026-07-18 → 2026-07-31 | 2,780 | 200 | 7.19% | 7.51% | settled |
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 2,953 | 194 | 6.57% | 7.31% ×1.11 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 3,785 | 135 | 3.57% | 7.20% ×2.02 | still landing |
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-09 → 2026-05-22 | 157 | 5 | 3.18% | 3.18% | settled |
| 2026-05-23 → 2026-06-05 | 1,258 | 57 | 4.53% | 4.53% | settled |
| 2026-06-06 → 2026-06-19 | 1,082 | 77 | 7.12% | 7.12% | settled |
| 2026-06-20 → 2026-07-03 | 815 | 51 | 6.26% | 6.35% | settled |
| 2026-07-04 → 2026-07-17 | 1,292 | 73 | 5.65% | 5.77% | settled |
| 2026-07-18 → 2026-07-31 | 1,016 | 54 | 5.31% | 5.63% | settled |
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 1,421 | 95 | 6.69% | 7.50% ×1.12 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 784 | 23 | 2.93% | 6.21% ×2.12 | still landing |
Too few settled bookings in this family to measure its own booking lag — the all-family lag curve is used, so its settled estimates are rougher than Meta's.
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-06 → 2026-06-19 | 755 | 25 | 3.31% | 3.34% | settled |
| 2026-06-20 → 2026-07-03 | 3,124 | 57 | 1.82% | 1.85% | settled |
| 2026-07-04 → 2026-07-17 | 2,243 | 58 | 2.59% | 2.64% | settled |
| 2026-07-18 → 2026-07-31 | 984 | 38 | 3.86% | 4.02% | settled |
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 1,405 | 36 | 2.56% | 2.80% ×1.09 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 1,023 | 18 | 1.76% | 2.72% ×1.55 | still landing |
Too few settled bookings in this family to measure its own booking lag — the all-family lag curve is used, so its settled estimates are rougher than Meta's.
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 206 | 4 | 1.94% | 2.20% ×1.13 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 916 | 3 | 0.33% | 0.52% ×1.59 | still landing |
Too few settled bookings in this family to measure its own booking lag — the all-family lag curve is used, so its settled estimates are rougher than Meta's.
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-04 → 2026-07-17 | 234 | 1 | 0.43% | 0.44% | settled |
| 2026-07-18 → 2026-07-31 | 2,901 | 50 | 1.72% | 1.80% | settled |
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 13 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% ×1.09 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 10 | 0 | 0.00% | 0.00% ×2.49 | still landing |
Too few settled bookings in this family to measure its own booking lag — the all-family lag curve is used, so its settled estimates are rougher than Meta's.
| Fortnight | Leads | Booked so far | Visible rate | Settled estimate | Cohort age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-01 → 2026-08-14 | 10 | 1 | 10.00% | 11.21% ×1.12 | still landing |
| 2026-08-15 → 2026-08-28 | 6 | 1 | 16.67% | 21.82% ×1.31 | still landing |
| City | Leads | Removed | Distributable | Booked | Spend | Cost / lead | Cost / distributable | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | 1,550 +31 snap | 161 10.4% | 1,366 88.1% | 53 3.9% | $33,951 | $21.90 | $24.85 | $640.58 |
| Dallas | 1,057 +63 snap | 130 12.3% | 888 84.0% | 34 3.8% | $23,103 | $21.86 | $26.02 | $679.50 |
| Chicago | 1,001 +155 snap | 132 13.2% | 866 86.5% | 12 1.4% | $21,831 | $21.81 | $25.21 | $1,819.25 |
| Houston | 973 +55 snap | 133 13.7% | 826 84.9% | 23 2.8% | $21,221 | $21.81 | $25.69 | $922.65 |
| New York | 929 +118 snap | 48 5.2% | 879 94.6% | 0 0.0% | $20,376 | $21.93 | $23.18 | — |
| Boston | 720 +57 snap | 111 15.4% | 602 83.6% | 25 4.2% | $15,690 | $21.79 | $26.06 | $627.60 |
| Orlando | 703 +48 snap | 119 16.9% | 576 81.9% | 15 2.6% | $15,281 | $21.74 | $26.53 | $1,018.73 |
| Nashville | 586 +56 snap | 108 18.4% | 471 80.4% | 30 6.4% | $12,733 | $21.73 | $27.03 | $424.43 |
| TOTAL | 7,519 | 942 12.5% | 6,474 86.1% | 192 3.0% | $164,186 | $21.84 | $25.36 | $855.14 |
Snapchat leads are shown for context but carry no spend — Mike's email priced Google Adult, Google Child and Meta only.
| Code | City | Family | Leads | Removed | Dupes | Rejected | Distributable | Booked | Spend | Cost / distributable | Cost / booking |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #FLKIDSX | Florida | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 815 | 38 4.7% | 1 | 7 | 769 94.4% | 31 4.0% | $17,930 | $23.32 | $578.39 |
| #NYKIDSX | New York | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 779 | 21 2.7% | 2 | 0 | 756 97.0% | 0 0.0% | $17,138 | $22.67 | — |
| #HOU1FX | Houston | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 587 | 74 12.6% | 3 | 7 | 503 85.7% | 13 2.6% | $12,914 | $25.67 | $993.38 |
| #FL1FX | Florida | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 586 | 76 13.0% | 5 | 10 | 495 84.5% | 22 4.4% | $12,892 | $26.04 | $586.00 |
| #CHI1FX | Chicago | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 541 | 65 12.0% | 3 | 0 | 473 87.4% | 9 1.9% | $11,902 | $25.16 | $1,322.44 |
| #DALKIDSX | Dallas | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 540 | 23 4.3% | 0 | 15 | 502 93.0% | 21 4.2% | $11,880 | $23.67 | $565.71 |
| #ORL1FX | Orlando | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 518 | 65 12.5% | 4 | 4 | 445 85.9% | 14 3.1% | $11,396 | $25.61 | $814.00 |
| #BOS1FX | Boston | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 398 | 39 9.8% | 1 | 3 | 355 89.2% | 16 4.5% | $8,756 | $24.66 | $547.25 |
| #DAL1FX | Dallas | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 366 | 62 16.9% | 1 | 23 | 280 76.5% | 13 4.6% | $8,052 | $28.76 | $619.38 |
| #CHIKIDSX | Chicago | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 269 | 7 2.6% | 0 | 0 | 262 97.4% | 3 1.1% | $5,918 | $22.59 | $1,972.67 |
| #NA1FX | Nashville | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 215 | 40 18.6% | 1 | 2 | 172 80.0% | 12 7.0% | $4,730 | $27.50 | $394.17 |
| #NAKIDSX | Nashville | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 212 | 12 5.7% | 0 | 4 | 196 92.5% | 18 9.2% | $4,664 | $23.80 | $259.11 |
| #HOUKIDSX | Houston | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 201 | 4 2.0% | 0 | 4 | 193 96.0% | 7 3.6% | $4,422 | $22.91 | $631.71 |
| #BOSKIDSX | Boston | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) | 172 | 18 10.5% | 0 | 3 | 151 87.8% | 9 6.0% | $3,784 | $25.06 | $420.44 |
| #CHIGX | Chicago | Adult Google | 118 | 34 28.8% | n/a | n/a | 84 71.2% | 0 0.0% | $2,478 | $29.50 | — |
| #HOUGX | Houston | Adult Google | 110 | 35 31.8% | n/a | n/a | 75 68.2% | 2 2.7% | $2,310 | $30.80 | $1,155.00 |
| #ORLDX | Orlando | Adult Google Demand Gen | 100 | 31 31.0% | n/a | n/a | 69 69.0% | 1 1.4% | $2,100 | $30.43 | $2,100.00 |
| #DALGX | Dallas | Adult Google | 99 | 39 39.4% | n/a | n/a | 60 60.6% | 0 0.0% | $2,079 | $34.65 | — |
| #NADX | Nashville | Adult Google Demand Gen | 98 | 34 34.7% | n/a | n/a | 64 65.3% | 0 0.0% | $2,058 | $32.16 | — |
| #NY1FX | New York | Adult Meta (Instagram) | 86 | 14 16.3% | 0 | 0 | 72 83.7% | 0 0.0% | $1,892 | $26.28 | — |
| #FLDX | Florida | Adult Google Demand Gen | 85 | 28 32.9% | n/a | n/a | 57 67.1% | 0 0.0% | $1,785 | $31.32 | — |
| #ORLGX | Orlando | Adult Google | 79 | 22 27.8% | n/a | n/a | 57 72.2% | 0 0.0% | $1,659 | $29.11 | — |
| #BOSDX | Boston | Adult Google Demand Gen | 77 | 28 36.4% | n/a | n/a | 49 63.6% | 0 0.0% | $1,617 | $33.00 | — |
| #HOUDX | Houston | Adult Google Demand Gen | 75 | 20 26.7% | n/a | n/a | 55 73.3% | 1 1.8% | $1,575 | $28.64 | $1,575.00 |
| #CHIDX | Chicago | Adult Google Demand Gen | 72 | 26 36.1% | n/a | n/a | 46 63.9% | 0 0.0% | $1,512 | $32.87 | — |
| #BOSGX | Boston | Adult Google | 72 | 25 34.7% | n/a | n/a | 47 65.3% | 0 0.0% | $1,512 | $32.17 | — |
| #FLGX | Florida | Adult Google | 63 | 18 28.6% | n/a | n/a | 45 71.4% | 0 0.0% | $1,323 | $29.40 | — |
| #DALDX | Dallas | Adult Google Demand Gen | 52 | 6 11.5% | n/a | n/a | 46 88.5% | 0 0.0% | $1,092 | $23.74 | — |
| #NASGX | Nashville | Adult Google | 44 | 11 25.0% | n/a | n/a | 33 75.0% | 0 0.0% | $924 | $28.00 | — |
| #NYDX | New York | Adult Google Demand Gen | 38 | 9 23.7% | n/a | n/a | 29 76.3% | 0 0.0% | $798 | $27.52 | — |
| #NYGX | New York | Adult Google | 21 | 4 19.0% | n/a | n/a | 17 81.0% | 0 0.0% | $441 | $25.94 | — |
| #NASPX | Nashville | Adult Google PMax | 17 | 11 64.7% | n/a | n/a | 6 35.3% | 0 0.0% | $357 | $59.50 | — |
| #ORLPX | Orlando | Adult Google PMax | 6 | 1 16.7% | n/a | n/a | 5 83.3% | 0 0.0% | $126 | $25.20 | — |
| #NYPX | New York | Adult Google PMax | 3 | 0 0.0% | n/a | n/a | 3 100.0% | 0 0.0% | $63 | $21.00 | — |
| #NYKPX | New York | Kids Google PMax | 2 | 0 0.0% | n/a | n/a | 2 100.0% | 0 0.0% | $44 | $22.00 | — |
| #BOSPX | Boston | Adult Google PMax | 1 | 1 100.0% | n/a | n/a | 0 0.0% | 0 — | $21 | — | — |
| #CHIPX | Chicago | Adult Google PMax | 1 | 0 0.0% | n/a | n/a | 1 100.0% | 0 0.0% | $21 | $21.00 | — |
| #FLPX | Florida | Adult Google PMax | 1 | 1 100.0% | n/a | n/a | 0 0.0% | 0 — | $21 | — | — |
| #CHISNAP | Chicago | Adult Snapchat | 155 | 16 10.3% | 0 | 0 | 139 89.7% | 3 2.2% | not priced | — | — |
| #NYSNAP | New York | Adult Snapchat | 118 | 10 8.5% | 0 | 0 | 108 91.5% | 0 0.0% | not priced | — | — |
| #DALSNAP | Dallas | Adult Snapchat | 63 | 8 12.7% | 0 | 0 | 55 87.3% | 4 7.3% | not priced | — | — |
| #BOSSNAP | Boston | Adult Snapchat | 57 | 8 14.0% | 0 | 0 | 49 86.0% | 2 4.1% | not priced | — | — |
| #NASSNAP | Nashville | Adult Snapchat | 56 | 4 7.1% | 0 | 1 | 51 91.1% | 0 0.0% | not priced | — | — |
| #HOUSNAP | Houston | Adult Snapchat | 55 | 6 10.9% | 0 | 1 | 48 87.3% | 2 4.2% | not priced | — | — |
| #ORLSNAP | Orlando | Adult Snapchat | 48 | 4 8.3% | 0 | 0 | 44 91.7% | 2 4.5% | not priced | — | — |
| #FLSNAP | Florida | Adult Snapchat | 31 | 4 12.9% | 0 | 0 | 27 87.1% | 1 3.7% | not priced | — | — |
| #DALPX | Dallas | Adult Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #HOUPX | Houston | Adult Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #BOSKPX | Boston | Kids Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #CHIKPX | Chicago | Kids Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #DALKPX | Dallas | Kids Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #FLKPX | Florida | Kids Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #HOUKPX | Houston | Kids Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| #ORLKPX | Orlando | Kids Google PMax | 0 | 0 — | n/a | n/a | 0 — | 0 — | $0 | — | — |
| Price band | Cost per lead | Applied to |
|---|---|---|
| Google Adult | $21.00 | Adult Google #…GX · Adult Google Demand Gen #…DX · Adult Google PMax #…PX |
| Google Child | $22.00 | Kids Google PMax #…KPX |
| Meta | $22.00 | Kids Meta (Insta/FB) #…KIDSX · Adult Meta (Instagram) #…1FX |
| Snapchat | not supplied | Adult Snapchat #…SNAP |
Families are mapped to platforms from the CRM's own campaign group names
(report_sales_contacts.js GROUP_PLATFORM), never guessed from the shape of the code.
Distributable lead = leads received − removed − duplicates − rejected. This is what is left for a collector to work.
Cost per distributable lead = (leads received × cost per lead) ÷ distributable leads. We pay for every lead delivered, including the ones we then bin — so the full spend sits on top of the smaller usable number.
Cost per booking = (leads received × cost per lead) ÷ bookings.
1 · Out-of-area is not in this sheet. Our canonical funnel strips OOA before dupes and removals. The supplied file has no OOA column, so every distributable count here is an over-statement and every cost per distributable lead is a floor. The true figure is worse, not better.
2 · The Google families carry no duplicate or rejected column. GX, DX, PX, KPX have leads / booked / removed only, so their distributable is leads − removed alone. Their cost per distributable lead is understated relative to Meta's, which helps Google in this comparison — the gap is real and if anything wider.
3 · Shows are immature. Only 13 shows are recorded against 192 bookings, because a booking taken in late August has mostly not sat yet. Cost per show is deliberately not shown — it would read as catastrophic for reasons that have nothing to do with lead quality.
4 · Snapchat has no price. 583 Snapchat leads (14 bookings, 521 distributable) are counted for volume but carry no cost anywhere on this page, and are excluded from every total. Ask Mike for the Snap rate and they can be folded in.
5 · One row in the source sheet is a paste slip.
#NASPX appears twice — once in the PMax block and again in the PMax Kids block
with identical figures. It is counted once. Counting it twice would have invented
$609 of spend that was never committed. Worth flagging back to Mike: Nashville's real
#NASKPX figure is missing.
6 · Ten days is ten days. 21–30 August 2026 is a short window and the low-volume families (Google Child PMax: 2 leads) carry no signal at all. Do not annualise the small ones.