Offering a superior product is no indication that your brand will be a market leader in the modern digital economy. It is a matter of aggression. Specifically, it is defined by the ability to execute a calculated offensive against direct competitors without compromising the unit economics of the overall portfolio.
This strategy is known as Search Conquesting.
For the VP of Marketing or the Head of Ecommerce, conquesting often represents a strategic dilemma. On paper, the logic is sound: Target users who are actively searching for a competitor, present a superior value proposition, and capture market share at the moment of highest intent.
In practice, however, conquesting is notoriously inefficient. Quality Scores are naturally low, Cost Per Click (CPC) is punitively high, and conversion rates often lag behind core brand terms. Consequently, many finance-driven organizations view conquesting as a “vanity project”—a way to annoy a rival rather than a legitimate revenue driver.
This view is obsolete. It relies on a legacy understanding of budget constraints.
Successful conquesting is not about lighting money on fire to buy a competitor’s traffic. It is a calculated offensive funded not by net-new budget, but by guaranteed branded budget efficiency.
The secret to winning the conquesting war is not spending more—it’s utilizing the “Trapped Capital” currently hidden in your own branded search inefficiencies to fund the attack.
The Financial Prerequisite: Funding the Offensive
Before discussing how to bid, we must solve the core structural challenge: The Budget Constraint.
In most marketing organizations, the budget is a finite resource. Branded search gets funding because it is “efficient” (high ROAS). Conquesting often falls into a “test budget” limbo because its CPA is naturally higher ($100 conquesting CPA vs. $5 brand CPA).
When a finance partner reviews the metrics, logic dictates cutting the conquesting budget to improve the blended average.
This is where the concept of Trapped Capital changes the game. The single largest barrier to effective conquesting is budget scarcity caused by overspending on your own uncontested brand terms. If you are paying $1.50 for a branded click that should cost $0.05, you are bleeding capital. That wasted $1.45 is the exact money you need to bid on your competitor’s terms.
By utilizing an efficiency layer (like AdAi) to strip away this waste, you create a self-funding mechanism. The savings from your “Peacetime” branded auctions are immediately redirected to your “Wartime” conquesting campaigns.
You are essentially subsidizing your high-cost offense with the savings from your optimized defense.
Conquesting as a Calculated Offensive
To execute this strategy, we must dismantle the misconception that conquesting is a blunt instrument. Many marketers treat competitor bidding as a broad-match dragnet. This approach fails because Google’s auction dynamics penalize irrelevance.
Effective conquesting acts as a sniper, not a shotgun. It requires a transition from “bidding on keywords” to “intercepting intent.”
High Precision Targeting and Ad Relevance
The primary objective in conquesting is to manufacture Ad Relevance in an environment where the algorithm naturally sees you as irrelevant (because you are not the brand the user searched for).
1. Keyword Precision: Beyond the Brand Name The easy mistake is bidding solely on the “Competitor Name.” This puts you in direct competition with their navigational traffic—users who just want to log in. The “Capital Allocator” marketer focuses on high-intent, mid-funnel queries:
- “Competitor Name + Pricing”: The user is price-sensitive.
- “Competitor Name + Alternatives”: The user is actively looking to churn.
- “Competitor Name + vs + [Your Brand]”: The user is in a direct “bake-off.”
By targeting these clusters, you naturally improve your Ad Relevance/CTR, which lowers your effective CPC.
2. Long-Tail Capture: Strategic Dynamic Search Ads (DSA) Even the most robust keyword list will miss the long tail (e.g., specific competitor model numbers). To ensure coverage, sophisticated teams utilize a “Target Only” DSA strategy:
- Create a specific page feed or set of landing pages dedicated to competitor comparisons.
- Set the DSA target to strictly crawl those comparison pages.
- The Result: When a user searches for a specific competitor model (“Competitor Model X-500 specs”), the DSA system matches the query to your comparison page. This captures niche, product-level searches that are often cheaper than the main brand terms.
Crafting High-Converting Copy: The “Better, Cheaper, Faster” Framework
Your ad copy must do the heavy lifting. You have to disrupt the user’s thought process in under two seconds. Do not use generic “Buy Now” messaging.
- The “Cheaper” Angle: “Switch from [Competitor] & Save 20%.”
- The “Better” Angle: “#1 Rated Alternative to [Competitor]. No Hidden Fees.”
- The “Faster” Angle: “Don’t Wait on [Competitor]. Ships Today.”
This direct, combative messaging serves a dual purpose: it filters the traffic (only users interested in switching will click) and it primes the user for the landing page experience.
The Post-Click Experience: The Comparative Landing Page
Sending conquesting traffic to your homepage is a capital crime. It creates Cognitive Dissonance. You must utilize Comparative Landing Pages:
- Feature Matrices: A check-mark chart showing where you win (e.g., “Free Shipping,” “24/7 Support”) and where they lose.
- Direct Value Prop: “Why 5,000 customers switched from [Competitor] to Us.”
If your ad bids on “[Competitor] pricing” and your landing page discusses “[Competitor] pricing” (even in a comparative context), your relevance score improves, lowering your CPC.
Budgeting and Bid Strategy for Success
You cannot manage these campaigns with the same targets as your core brand campaigns.
1. Set the Acceptable Floor (LTV-ROAS) Conquested customers are net-new acquisitions. Their Lifetime Value (LTV) is high. Establish a specific “Conquesting ROAS” target that is lower than your branded target. If your LTV is $500, a $100 CPA for a conquested customer is a profitable trade.
2. Bid Aggressiveness: The “Wartime” Mandate In conquesting, second place is the first loser. Implement aggressive Target CPA (tCPA) strategies and uncap the bids. Allow the algorithm to bid 2x or 3x your average CPC if it detects a high-probability conversion. This aggressiveness is only possible because your Efficiency Layer is keeping your core brand costs at the floor.
The 3 Steps to Launch
To execute this playbook immediately, follow this strict order of operations:
- Secure Unlocked Growth Capital: Audit your branded spend with an efficiency layer (AdAi) to identify the Trapped Capital. Ring-fence those savings as your “Conquesting War Chest.”
- Set a Dedicated LTV Target: Do not blend metrics. Create a specific campaign with a tROAS goal based on net-new customer LTV.
- Implement Comparative Assets: Build the “Battle Pages” and write the “Better, Cheaper, Faster” copy.
Conclusion
Conquesting is the ultimate test of a marketer’s ability to allocate capital. The mistake most organizations make is trying to fund this war from their general operating budget.
Success comes when you realize that your defense and your offense are financially linked. By securing Unlocked Growth Capital through rigorous branded optimization, you unlock the resources required to launch a high-precision attack. True growth comes when you stop spending unnecessarily on your own name and start exacting a toll on your competitors.
