I set fire to ad budgets so you do not have to: Meta vs Google for SaaS under 10k MRR

Adlift data from small-budget accounts. Short version: Google captures demand, Meta manufactures it. Under 10k MRR you usually have no demand to capture, so everyone runs Meta, burns cash, and concludes "ads do not work". The conclusion is wrong, the sequence is wrong.

Order that works: first, 500 euros on branded + competitor search (cheap, converts, funds the learning). Second, one Meta creative test: 3 angles, 2 formats, 20 euros a day each, kill fast (kill at 2x target CAC with zero conversions, no sentimentality). Third, only scale the winner, and only with fresh creative weekly (fatigue is real at small audiences, frequency lies).

Biggest waste: agencies selling 2k retainers to 3k-MRR products. At that size the founder must run ads personally for one quarter. Nobody will learn your customer for 2k a month.

Ex-colleague confirms and sharpens: the creative is the targeting now. Broad audiences + distinct creative beats narrow targeting + generic creative, every test this year. Three angles minimum or do not start.

Yes. Targeting is automated, creative is the input. Founders who "tested Meta" with one tired image tested nothing. Three angles, two formats, kill fast. The discipline is the strategy.

Performance-marketing veteran amen. The founder-must-run-it quarter is the line agencies hate and clients need. Nobody learns your customer on a retainer. Do the quarter, then hire with knowledge.

Elif trained me and the kill-fast rule is what I drill into plumbers: 2x CAC, zero conversions, dead, no funeral. Sentimentality is the most expensive ad setting.

Sponsor-side view: the same creative discipline applies to newsletter ads. Three angles, track with proper UTMs, kill fast. Most sponsors run one static creative for months and blame the newsletter. It was the creative. It is always the creative.