A regional air-conditioning installer turned a rebuilt ad account into A$5M of new revenue.

Demand was real, but the account could not scale it.

i Heat & Cool installs air conditioning across a wide, competitive footprint in eastern Victoria. Lead volume sat at one to two a day. Spend was capped well below where the demand actually was, because the account was not built in a way that let it grow without the cost per lead running away.

Three problems compounded each other. Campaigns treated every region and job type the same, so budget bled into postcodes and search terms that were either too competitive to win profitably or too low-value to matter. There was no read on which leads were worth chasing hardest, or which member of the team turned them into jobs. And nothing in the plan accounted for the deep seasonality of air conditioning demand, which meant spend was flat into peaks and troughs alike.

The brief was not "more leads at any price". It was to scale spend several times over while keeping cost per acquisition under control and the pipeline converting.

Rebuild the account around region, margin and the pipeline behind it.

Blufire treated paid media as a system tied to commercial outcomes, not a set of campaigns judged on clicks. The work ran on four fronts.

• Google Ads rebuilt by region, competitiveness and margin. Campaigns were restructured so budget concentrated on the areas and job types where i Heat & Cool could win profitably, and pulled back from the over-competitive, low-margin terms that had been quietly draining spend.
• Pipeline analytics to route high-intent leads. By tracking leads through to closed jobs, the team could see that close rates differed sharply by who handled the lead. High-intent enquiries were routed to the stronger closer, lifting conversion from roughly 25% to 56% on that path, so every paid lead was worth more at the same media cost.
• Meta as a cost-control layer. Rather than chasing the most expensive search auctions for every incremental lead, Meta ran as a cheaper acquisition channel to hold blended cost down, and roughly half the Meta spend was offset through supplier co-op funding.
• Seasonal financial modelling and area-page SEO. Spend was modelled against the seasonality of air conditioning demand so budget leaned into the peaks and eased through the quiet months, while location-specific SEO pages built a cheaper, durable lead source underneath the paid layer.

The analytics were not a report on the side. The close-rate read and the seasonal model decided where the next dollar of spend went.

None of this required a bigger budget to prove out. It required knowing, lead by lead and region by region, which spend earned its place. Once that was visible, scaling spend from A$3K to A$20K a month was a controlled decision rather than a gamble.

A$5M of new revenue, and a cost per acquisition cut in half.

Over FY25 the account scaled by an order of magnitude while the unit economics improved rather than degraded. Lead flow went from one to two a day to ten to fifteen, settling at more than 250 leads and around 100 phone calls a month.

The compounding effect is the point. Cheaper acquisition through Meta, more conversions from the same Google spend, and a pipeline that closed at more than double the rate on its best path together turned a constrained account into A$5M of new FY25 revenue.