Your channel mix is wrong, and the data is in the warehouse to prove it.

Your channel mix is wrong. The data is in the warehouse to prove it.

The mix problem is rarely a single bad channel. It's a portfolio that drifted — usually toward whatever was cheap two years ago, plus whatever a previous agency was good at running. Six quarters later you're over-indexed on one channel by an embarrassing margin and starving two others that would scale if they had budget.

What we actually do

Three workstreams, in this order:

• Channel-mix audit. Where the spend is, where the revenue is, where the margin is, where the LTV is. Compared against efficient mixes for operators of your scale and vertical. The output is a reallocation hypothesis — not a final answer, but a starting bet that's defensible.
• Paid efficiency rebuild. Bid strategy, creative rotation, audience structure, conversion-event hierarchy. Most accounts have at least one of these wrong, and fixing it is a 15-30% efficiency lift on the same spend.
• Creative velocity discipline. Ads that worked stop working. Most operators respond by running the same ads for too long. We build a testing cadence — how many new concepts per week, win-rate threshold, refresh signal — and run it as a process, not a project.

What we don't do

We don't run brand campaigns. We don't pitch billboards. We don't tell you to triple your influencer spend because it's "where the audience is." Marketing for performance verticals is a measurement game. If a channel can't be measured to a margin number, we treat it as speculation, not strategy.

What you get

A channel mix that survives policy shocks (iOS, ad-platform suspensions, regulatory changes). A creative pipeline that runs without you in it. Quarterly reviews on whether the mix is still right — because the answer changes.