Google Ads for B2B SaaS companies | Founder at Grouts Online | Book a Call below to fix and scale your ads

Helping B2B SaaS marketers turn Google Ads into a predictable source of high-intent demo requests and pipeline opportunities with a 90-day Google Ads Growth Sprint.

We build and execute Google Ads strategies designed to drive measurable pipeline impact for B2B SaaS companies. 

Results for our clients:
- Generated $1,65 in pipeline from Paid Search campaigns in 12 months
- Scaled Google Ads from 0 to 30+ demo requests a month in 6 months
- Generated $100k in the Pipeline in 2 months with 5k/month in Paid Search
- Improved conversion rate from 0.3% to 2.25% and reduced CPA by 83%
- Scaled Paid Search from 10k to 20k/month and generated 200k in pipeline in first month

If you’re a B2B SaaS founder or marketing lead spending $20K+/month and want to cut wasted spend and scale pipeline in 90 days, book a call or send me a DM.

Roman Krs

CRM changes are more dangerous for Google Ads than you think.

When you’re spending $30K+ per month and using offline import, optimizing for MQL, SQL, or Opportunities, and you tweak something in the funnel.

You can break the momentum and campaign results for weeks if you are not prepared.

Any changes that cause differences in quality or volume will impact the campaigns.

- lifecycle stages
- qualification logic
- definitions 


The more you spend, the greater the impact. 

Suddenly: 
- Performance looks “off” 
- Conversion signals shift 
- Algorithms starve data

The campaign targeting and bidding stop working, and it starts wasting money on different segments, overbidding on keywords, etc.


Tracking stability matters more than most teams realize.

If you rely on smart bidding and offline conversions, CRM changes are not small admin updates.

They’re structural events to the campaigns that you have to take into account ahead.

Google Ads for B2B SaaS companies | Founder at Grouts Online | Book a call to cut wasted spend & scale pipeline → best for $20K+/mo budgets

One client hit a ceiling.

Not because Google Ads “stopped working.”

But because budgets were capped.


Performance felt flat, and volume wasn’t growing.

CPL looked high, so the instinct was to optimize down.


Maintain budgets, search terms, keywords, and bidding strategies. 

Focus on Lower CPL before we start scaling.


But that wasn’t the constraint.

We stepped back, mapped the actual unit economics, and confirmed a reasonable CPL based on historical data.

So we started scaling budgets on converting campaigns.

- Volume increased.
- Pipeline increased.
- Efficiency held within expected range.

Suddenly, scaling wasn’t guessing, and we had a clear benchmark. 


We still focused on efficiency, pausing keywords and working on landing pages. 

But the growth gave confidence to scale further and to prioritize fixing bottlenecks in optimization.

The problem with low volume isn't always the budget or keywords.


Sometimes the problem isn’t reach.

It’s the offer and how it resonates with users at different stages of the funnel. 


In one account, search volume was there.

Traffic was qualified, attracting ICP accounts.


But the conversions were inconsistent.

Some people converted 1-3 months after first visit. 

Silence in between.


So instead of expanding keywords, we: 
- Tailor LP messaging for mid-funnel traffic.
- Stopped pushing only demo request
- Added “Build Your Business Case” CTA

We kept both because we don't want to disqualify users ready to convert.

But we also want to capture and start conversations with prospects in the research stage.

Because it’s better to capture intent early and help the prospects. Rather than waiting for them to do their own research and convert with competitors.


When volume stalls, don’t always expand.

Sometimes you need to reposition the offer with lower friction to start a conversation.

I didn’t close a single new client for months, and I felt stuck.

I kept telling myself I needed:

- Start outreach to build a pipeline
- Better LinkedIn posts to improve reach
- Have more sales calls to grow

But that wasn’t the real issue.

The truth?

I was drowning in service delivery.

Ad hoc fixes, cleaning tracking, improving structures, and reporting.


Important work.

But time consuming or reactive.


There was no time left for:
- Improving processes
- Designing scalable delivery
- Focusing on sales & marketing

I was fragmented.

My business still relied too much on me.

And every new client added weight instead of leverage.

That’s why this year isn’t about growth first.

It’s about foundations.

1/ Fewer priorities
2/ Standardizing delivery
3/ Locking 2-week ops sprints
4/ Removing steps from processes
5/ Protecting focus (the actual mental focus)


Because growth before structure feels exciting. But it's stressful.

And growth with structure feels more effortless.


And I burned myself doing both and haven't made real progress.

Demo volume is inconsistent, and the pipeline isn’t converting?


Campaigns delivering. Competitive spend. Relevant keywords. 

Everything looks right from a high level.


But the performance feels off.


The issue usually isn’t the keywords.

It’s the lack of B2B SaaS structure.

Most accounts I audit show the same structural gaps:

1/ No clear intent segmentation
2/ Generic and low-intent absorbing most of the spend
3/ Wrong match types and bidding strategies wasting budgets
4/ Generic ads and landing pages not aligned with intent

Traffic comes. Demos don’t convert. Pipeline build slowly.


Search isn’t just about targeting keywords.

It’s about separating high-intent, category, competitor, and brand properly.


Without structure, scaling just increases inefficiency.


Predictable pipeline doesn’t come from more campaigns.

It comes from the right structure.


Fix structure. Then scale.

I don’t struggle with discipline.

I wake up early.
I work weekends.
I workout 4x a week

Discipline isn’t the issue.

Focus is.


What I’ve realized recently is this:

You can be disciplined and still not move forward fast enough.

Because discipline gets you to the desk.

Focus decides whether you execute fast & well.


Most of my days are packed with service delivery.

Campaign launches.
Landing page fixes.
Ad copy updates.
Negative keyword cleanups.
Reporting tweaks.

And other important work to drive results for clients.

On top of that, I’m trying to push growth work forward.

Systemizing delivery.
Implementing AI.
Driving sales.
Creating content.

And doing all of that requires deep focus.


But when you work on a computer all day, distraction is constant.

One tab becomes five.
One idea becomes a rabbit hole.
One “quick check” becomes 20 minutes.

You lose focus and momentum. 


Now, it isn’t only about better discipline.

It’s about designing a system that minimizes ad hoc interruptions.

I’ve tried a lot:

- Website blockers/time schedule
- Planning the day ahead
- Calendar blocks

It helps.


But it’s still difficult to get into real flow, and very easy to drift.

It's hard to build the habit of focus, and easy to break it.


What techniques or tools help you avoid drifting during the day?

Brand Search used to way to protect the brand from the competition.

And it was efficient.

It had a low CPC and didn't require high spend. 

And it generated data for the account.


Now?


Competition is aggressive.

Impression share battles push CPCs and spend.

And losing position means fewer high-intent and high-quality leads that would otherwise come to you.


We tested pushing IS toward 80%. (not even absolute TOP)

Costs became unreasonable. CPA skyrocketed.

We pulled back budgets, adjusted bidding, or shifted to smart bidding.

And it helped to balance protection vs efficiency. (for now)


In some segments, protecting the brand became a fight for high-intent leads, where more players win, and you score less.

And it requires a different approach.

But also isn’t worth all your budget. 


How much are you willing to pay to defend demand?

For months, we were tightening structure, cleaning terms, and improving CPL.

Progress was steady. But volume was flat and inconsistent.


Then we did something simple:

We had a clear unit economics goal, and we decided to keep increasing budgets weekly.


Same structure. Same signals. Same landing pages.

Volume jumped. Efficiency stayed. The pipeline grew.


The lesson?

At a certain point, you’re not limited by optimization.

You’re limited by spending and low positions.


Micro-tweaks feel productive.

But if the math works, the budget is the lever.


Sometimes growth isn’t complicated.


PS: But don't get complacent and keep working on conversion rates.

You’re quietly wasting six figures in ad spend.


On paper, everything looks right.

Performance on dashboards looks normal. Meaningful spend. Relevant keywords. 

Yet demo volume and quality are inconsistent and not growing.


The issue isn’t always the keywords or lack of budget.

What’s often missing are clean, reliable conversion signals.

Most accounts I audit show the same patterns:

- Messy primary conversions not tied to demo intent
- No reporting connecting the pipeline back to the ad spend
- Offline conversions are missing or unreliable


And Google optimizes exactly what it sees.

If it sees mixed or no signals, it creates volatility.

And when you scale budgets, it breaks.


Predictable pipeline doesn’t come only from spending more.

It comes from feeding Google the right outcomes first.

Fix the tracking before you scale or even before you spend the first $.


That gives you more stable performance from the get-go, and CAC starts trending down over time.

CAC goes up, and scaling never feels safe.

The issue usually isn’t budget or bidding.

It’s how the account is managed.

Most audits reveal the same process gaps: 
1/ No structured optimization, 
2/ Budgets spread thin across too many campaigns, 
3/ Structural changes made reactively to fix the problem, 
4/ Changes and experiments not logged or measured. 

Nothing compounds, and every tweak resets learning.

Scaling doesn’t fail because of Google. It fails because discipline is missing.

Predictable pipeline doesn’t come from activity. It comes from structured iteration.


When Google Ads stops resetting every 3 months, it starts behaving like a predictable system and channel.

Driving Brand-Centric Growth for Start-Ups & Scale-Ups 🚀 Loading Next Chapter…

In early 2025, I changed direction.

I had just spent nearly 2 years running my own marketing agency: leading clients, building campaigns, and doing the work. All of it.

We helped brands grow, and on paper, it looked like a win.

But behind the scenes, I was doing what many founders end up doing:

→ Writing newsletters at night.
→ Putting out fires during the day.
→ And slowly losing the spark that made me start in the first place.

So I stepped back. Not from the work itself, but from the model.

And I asked myself a simple question:

What kind of work do I actually want to do?

The answer?

Writing. Storytelling. Helping people say what they really mean—clearly, strategically, and in a way that makes others listen.

Today, I help B2B brands and founders grow through strategic content and personal branding.
That might look like:

→ Weekly LinkedIn posts that actually sound like you.
→ A content engine that runs without you hiring a full-time team.
→ Positioning that makes people say: “That’s exactly what I needed to hear.”

I combine what I learned in performance marketing with what I know about brand building and narrative.
Because content shouldn’t just fill a feed—it should move something.

If that resonates, I’d love to hear what you’re working on.

Book a free strategy session with me here: https://calendly.com/hello-waltersandfeld/discovery

Walter Sandfeld

10,285 people have watched a 54-minute video of my fiction writing being critiqued on YouTube.

That taught me a lot.

Writing fiction has been a completely solitary experience for me for the longest time.

But when Jed Herne (Fantasy Author & YouTuber with +160k subs) asked his community for submissions to critique their first 1,000 words, I couldn't resist.

Wouldn't you know it, he picked my story.

And the video taught me A LOT.

1) Good writing doesn't happen in a vacuum.

It's not a coincidence that the acknowledgement section at the end of books is often packed with names. 

Every published author had readers, editors, and critics helping them improve.

I thought I could write this book entirely on my own. 

Turns out, that's a pretty naive approach.

2) Some people will dislike your writing voice.

It's been interesting to follow the comment section on this video.

→ Some agree with Jed's edits.
→ Some critique him for altering too much.

Either way, the lesson is the same: you can't write for everyone. 

Different readers want different things. Find your audience and write for them.

3) Sharing your work publicly is uncomfortable and necessary.

I was nervous posting this. Letting 10,000+ people see my unpolished writing felt vulnerable.

But feedback from someone ahead of you is worth more than staying comfortable.

Thanks to Jed for taking the time to make this video. 

It will undoubtedly help me take the book closer to publishable quality.

(Link for those interested: https://lnkd.in/e672Tr4h)

undefined undefined

Google Analytics Certification

Google Ads Display Certification

Google Ads Search Certification

Google Analytics Individual Qualification

Story-Driven Content Marketing + Personal Branding for B2B Brands, Agencies & Executives ⁕ Grow your Pipeline without raising your Ad Spend.

Get 'The Storyseller’s Guide to Positioning' for FREE

Book a Free Brand Consultation (30 min.)

Story-Driven Ghostwriter → Helping busy Founders & Execs tell their stories online (+ profit from it) | Writing my Debut Fantasy Novel on the side.

I saw someone bragging on LinkedIn that they wrote 15 posts in an hour using AI.

Cool. I spent two hours yesterday writing one post for a client.

Because the work isn't writing words. It's figuring out what's worth saying in the first place.

AI can generate a post in 30 seconds. 

It can probably even mimic your voice if you train it well enough.

But it can't tell you:

· Which story from your client call actually matters
· When something is technically correct but feels off
· What insight your audience needs vs. what sounds clever

That part still requires a human making decisions.

I use AI in my process. But mostly for structure and speed once I already know what I'm building.

The value is in the thinking that happens before and after the AI touches it.

What makes content work isn't efficiency. 

It's whether someone reading it thinks "yes, that's exactly what I needed to hear."

Your audience can tell the difference between content that was thought through and content that was generated.

Not because of the writing quality. Because of whether it actually helps them or not.

Speed is useful. But only if what you're producing fast is worth reading in the first place.

Copying your competitor is making your content worse. 

Here's why:

· You see what works in your industry.
· You copy their format & voice.
· You sound exactly like them.

Result: Your audience can't tell you apart.
What works better:

Look outside your industry.

· What stories does that fashion brand tell?
· How does that design agency handle objections?
· How does that fintech founder explain complex concepts?

I worked with a cybersecurity CEO who was stuck writing boring compliance posts.

We studied how a restaurant owner talked about food safety.

Suddenly his cybersecurity content became stories about what happens when systems fail.

(His engagement 3x'ed).

Stop competing on the same playing field.

Find a different game entirely.

What industry outside yours has the best storytellers?

Quick writing tip: Eliminate "and then" storytelling.

"We launched the product. And then we got our first customers. And then we scaled."

That's a sequence. Not a story.

The brain doesn't run on sequences → it runs on cause and effect. 

When something happens in your story, readers are already wiring it to what came next. 

They're looking for the logic underneath.

Trey Parker (South Park) has a rule for this:

Replace every "and then" with "but" or "so."

"We launched the product. But nobody showed up. So we went back to the drawing board."

Same facts. Completely different pull.

→ The moment you add friction and consequence, you stop reporting and start storytelling.

(Tip via The Science of Storytelling by Will Storr. Worth reading.)

No alternative text description for this image

The 4 core types of writing all have 1 common pitfall (which you are probably making) ↓

Info-dumping.

A.K.A → when you prioritize sharing information over creating understanding.

You throw facts, insights, and knowledge at your reader without considering whether they can actually process or apply it.

Whether you are writing:

· Short Form Non-Fiction (Posts, Threads, Newsletters)
· Long Form Non-Fiction (E-books, Blogs, Articles)
· Short Form Fiction (Short Stories)
· Long Form Fiction (Novels)

Focus on one clear point per piece of writing.

Ask yourself: "What's the single thing I want my reader to think, feel, or do after reading this?"

Then structure everything around that outcome.

I've ghostwritten for a lot of founders.

And the ones doing best on LinkedIn right now don't have the biggest audiences.

· Some have never gone viral.
· Some have under 2,000 followers.
· Some started posting years months ago.

But there's a pattern I keep noticing.

The ones with the most traction share something that has nothing to do with reach, tenure, or production value.

They've stopped keeping a professional distance from their own story.

Not in a reckless way.
Not in a "here's my therapy session" way.

But when we sit down to work on content together, we use their words, their context, their texture.

We write from the moments that shaped how they think.

· The realisation that came too late.
· The client who pushed back. 
· The strategy that flopped. 

That's the raw material. And it's what makes the content land.

But here's what I find just as interesting:

What those founders DON'T do matters just as much.

They don't polish the uncertainty out.
They don't reach for industry language when plain language would work.
They don't perform confidence they don't actually have yet.

They show up as the person who's figured some things out (and is still figuring out the rest).

→ That's what builds trust on LinkedIn. Not a flawless personal brand. A legible one.

The most underrated skill in ghostwriting isn't writing.

It's asking good questions.

I figured this out slowly through a LOT of interviews that went nowhere and a handful that produced more material than I knew what to do with.

The difference was almost never the questions themselves.

Before every content interview, I do prep. 

I put together personalized questions (things that only make sense to ask that specific person) based on what I know about their background, their business, the story we're trying to tell.

I also keep a running bank of evergreen questions I reuse across clients. 

The ones that reliably unlock something interesting regardless of who's on the other end.

But here's what took me longer to learn:

→ How you ask matters more than what you ask.

You can have a perfectly prepared question that dies the moment you deliver it too stiffly. 

And you can ask something completely off-script, sparked by something they just said, that opens up the best material of the whole conversation.

The things I've found hardest to teach myself:

· Don't prepare a script. Prepare a direction.
· Let the conversation breathe before steering it.

Get good at noticing the moment their energy shifts because you've landed on something they actually care about.

That's where the best content lives.

Some days, I'm seriously considering quitting the solopreneur thing.

I love the flexibility and freedom to choose how to spend my own time.

BUT part of me also miss working alongside talented people on a daily basis towards a common goal.

There is no real "point" with this post other than the fact that I think solopreneurship is often idolized and I want to bring a bit of nuance to the convo 🤷‍♂️

I became a ghostwriter by accident.

It wasn’t because I took a course.
It wasn’t because it made sense strategically.
It wasn’t because I needed to “shake things up”

I'd spent years working in (and eventually co-founding) marketing agencies and somewhere along the way, I started building my own presence on LinkedIn.

At some point I got tired of writing about ecom funnels and paid media. 

I started gravitating toward something that felt more interesting to me: 

Founder-led brands. 

a.k.a → Companies where the person at the top was the story.

That's when the DMs started.

Other agency owners asking how I was getting traction on LinkedIn + Whether I could help them do the same.

When I eventually stepped away from my old agency, leaning into that felt like the obvious move.

At first, it was just helping people find their voice. 
Cleaning up a profile here and there.
Writing a few posts. 

But the work kept pulling me somewhere deeper.

The positioning conversations. 
The "what am I actually known for?" conversations. 
The ones where a founder would say something off-hand in a call and I'd think "that's what the whole content strategy should be built around".

Now that's the work I do.

→ I became a ghostwriter by accident. I stayed because the work turned out to be more interesting than anything I'd planned.

Quick writing tip: If you're overwhelmed trying to define your content strategy, start with what you DON'T want.

· Who you don't want to be.
· Who you don't want to sound like.
· What you don't want to write about.

This is often easier than defining what you DO want.

When I started writing, I had no idea what my "voice" was supposed to be.

But I knew exactly what I didn't want:

· I didn't want to sound like a motivational speaker.
· I didn't want to write generic business advice.
· I didn't want every post to end with "agree?"

Cutting out what you don't want is easier than defining what you do want.

Your voice emerges from what you're willing to cut.

5 myths about ghostwriting that keep founders stuck ↓ 

1. "It's not authentic if I don't write it myself"
2. "My industry is too technical/boring"
3. "People will know it's ghostwritten"
4. "It's too expensive for what I get"
5. "I need to be a good writer first"

Here's what I actually see:

· Good ghostwriting is invisible
· You need expertise, not writing skills
· Technical industries need clear communication most
· Your expertise + clear communication = authentic content
· One quality client from LinkedIn pays for months of content

The best founders I work with focus on what they do best.

Then let others handle the rest.

Which myth have you been believing?

Quick content tip: 

Every piece of value you publish is a deposit.

Every CTA is a withdrawal.

Most founders get the ratio wrong. 

They're asking for conversions before they've built up anything worth spending. 

The audience feels it, even if they can't name it.
T
he ones who get it right treat the value as the main event and the CTA as an afterthought. 

Because the trust has to come first.

A few things I keep in mind before adding any ask to a post:

· Have I given enough for this to feel like a fair exchange?
· Would I feel comfortable asking this of someone I just met?
· Does this CTA align with what the content was actually about?

Your content builds the account. Choose carefully what you spend it on.

A big part of my job has nothing to do with writing.

It's convincing founders that what they lived through last Tuesday is worth putting on the internet.

Almost every client I've worked with has said some version of the same thing at some point:

"I mean... it's just what I do. I don't know if anyone would actually find that interesting."

And almost every time, they're wrong.

The problem is that they've lived with it long enough that it stopped feeling remarkable. 

· Pivots have been rationalised. 
· Hard lessons have been absorbed. 
· What took them three years to figure out now feels like common sense.

But to the person who's six months behind them, it's exactly what they needed to hear.

I've started thinking of this as the curse of proximity. 

The closer you are to your own expertise, the less impressive it looks from the inside.

My job is to sit across from that and say: "no, that thing you just said casually, in passing, like it was obvious? That's the post."

I've written +1.500 LinkedIn posts (for myself + clients).

Here are 12 things I've learned that actually move the needle ↓ 

THE 'DO'S':

· Write like you're talking to one person
· Break up walls of text with white space
· Lead with the problem, not the solution
· Use stories from your actual experience
· End with a question that makes people think
· Keep your expertise visible but not overwhelming

THE 'DON'TS':

· Post something and disappear from the comments
· Copy what worked for someone else's audience
· Use industry jargon when simple words work
· Make every post about how smart you are
· Share advice you haven't actually tested
· Write posts that could apply to anyone

The fundamentals haven't changed much, but most people still skip them.

They're looking for hacks when what they need is consistency around the basics.

Your content doesn't need to be revolutionary. It needs to be useful to the specific people you're trying to reach.

taplio

The Battle

Roman Krs

Walter Sandfeld

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreRoman Krs's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreWalter Sandfeld's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Roman Krs

Walter Sandfeld

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Roman Krs's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreWalter Sandfeld's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreRoman Krs's LinkedIn Performance