No offer until the 24th. Then the client decided on 30% sitewide, and we weren't allowed to see the margin or take part in setting it.
Working with what's available. Which is most real work.
It started in the Ad Library: brands running the same offer or other Black Friday offers, taken as inspiration for messaging rather than copied. Samples went into a sheet with an explanation for each creative, what it should look like and what it should emphasise.
At the same time, a simple Canva template: best sellers with a badge, stars, and "Black Friday 30% sitewide" in loud red. And the offer written everywhere, in the copy, on the website, on the banner, on the product page.
On the dashboard: a prospecting catalogue campaign that had been running for a while, with its copy edited toward urgency and scarcity, the offer ending on 1-12 and stock running low. Plus a second lifetime campaign for testing.
Not one of the designer's creatives delivered.
What worked was the simple template in flex format.
Non-performers were closed, performers were switched on, and budget rose gradually under push and punishment. ROAS was poor, so I didn't push hard.
The exact numbers. Before the offer (1 to 23 November, 23 days): 87 orders, CVR 1.09%, ROAS 1.7. After the offer (24 to 30 November, 7 days): 68 orders, CVR 1.24%, ROAS 2.4.
The daily average multiplied two and a half times, and ROAS went from 1.7 to 2.4 in a week.
The numbers aren't large, and we're saying that deliberately. The brand has no authority yet, no testimonials, and few creatives. This is work done with what was available, on a brand at the start of its road.
What comes next is written down: fixing best-seller stock so they can be scaled, entering Google Ads to cover the whole customer journey, creatives on fabric and styling for retargeting, collecting testimonials, testing more offers against margin, and frequently-bought-together to raise AOV.
Clarity sells and the test decides. Not the designer, and not taste.
The lesson
Clarity sells; the test decides
