Case studies.
Not a highlight reel. Each one is written in the order it happened, so you can see what was decided and why before you see what it produced.
How to read these
-
01
Situation
What existed before we started, including the parts that were already working.
-
02
Build
What we put in place, in the order we put it there, and what we deliberately left alone.
-
03
Result
What changed, measured against the number agreed at the start rather than whichever metric flatters us.
Zero to a full pipeline.
An agent closing deals entirely on referral, with no ad account, no content beyond phone photos, and enquiries tracked in a notes app.
-
Situation
Every deal came from personal referral. That is a good problem until the referrals slow down, and there was nothing underneath to catch demand when they did. No ad account, no content library, and no system for handling an enquiry once it arrived.
-
Build
Listing walkthroughs and agent-brand content shot in batched production days, so each property visit produced both the cinematic cut and the vertical social set. Then a CRM with real lead capture, routing, and stage tracking, plus automated follow-up triggered on enquiry so first response happened in minutes.
-
Result
The account has run continuously since launch. It reached 315,785 people and produced 337 leads at $18.72 each, and 13 of those turned into homes sold. The agent is no longer dependent on referral volume to keep the pipeline moving.
Campaign results
Meta Ads Manager, Facebook and Instagram, all time
Twice the leads per dollar.
A paid social programme for a real estate account, built on video creative and a messaging objective so an interested buyer lands in a conversation, not a form.
-
Situation
Listings and agent content were being produced and posted, and that was where it ended. Nothing was putting the work in front of people outside the existing following, and nothing was catching the ones who did respond.
-
Build
Video-led creative across Facebook and Instagram against a messaging objective, so the ad opens a conversation instead of asking for a form fill. Creative ran in rotation and was tested rather than set once, with budget following whichever hooks held attention past the first few seconds.
-
Result
The account reached 91,933 people and returned 367 leads at $8.56 each, with 5 closing as homes sold. More leads than the build above, at less than half the cost each, which is what a well-matched offer and tested creative does to lead cost.
Campaign results
Meta Ads Manager, Facebook and Instagram, all time
Vacancies that filled faster.
A commercial real estate portfolio where listings sat too long, marketing materials were inconsistent property to property, and nothing existed as a repeatable system for attracting tenants.
-
Situation
Listings were sitting on the market longer than they should have. Marketing materials were inconsistent across properties, social presence was minimal, and there was no repeatable system for tenant attraction or seasonal push campaigns. Leasing agents needed materials that closed deals faster, not just filled a folder.
-
Build
Six workstreams, run together. Listing presentation rebuilt with professional photography and consistent branding. Print and digital brochures designed to move a lead from interest to enquiry. Tenant attraction campaigns aimed at filling vacancies with qualified tenants rather than traffic. Architectural portfolios for high-value prospects. Seasonal pushes timed to leasing cycles. And a multichannel strategy across social, email and print so every touchpoint said the same thing.
-
Result
Consistent, professional materials gave leasing agents stronger tools to close faster. Social content built interest around specific properties instead of generic posting, which showed up directly in tour attendance and inbound enquiries. The shift from scattered marketing to a coordinated system changed how quickly properties moved.
Portfolio performance
Client engagement reporting
Change across the engagement
- Social media engagement +64%
- Event & tour attendance +52%
- Property page & listing views +48%
- Qualified leasing enquiries +37%
- Average time-on-market -29%
Estimated performance across the engagement period, as reported by the client. Bars are scaled against the largest change in the set; time-on-market falling is a gain, not a loss.