The "More Is Better" Trap: Why Your Website Traffic Strategy Might Be A Leaky Bucket

AI Answer Box

Most Google Ads accounts leak money because they pay for concepts instead of intent. Google’s defaults push broad targeting, loose location settings, and irrelevant competitor traffic — all of which inflate clicks without improving profit. The solution is an exclusion architecture: tightening search terms, restricting geographic presence, and limiting conquesting to high‑intent queries. This reduces volume but dramatically increases profitability by focusing spend on decision‑ready users.

TL;DR

More traffic isn’t better — better traffic is better. Google’s defaults push broad targeting that wastes budget on low‑intent searches, irrelevant locations, and competitor queries that will never convert. When you tighten your exclusion architecture, volume drops but profitability skyrockets. Ask your team one question: “Are we paying for the concept of our service, or the intent to buy it?”

Why More Clicks Doesn’t Mean More Profit

What We’ll Cover:

• Why Google's default settings work against your P&L.

• The difference between paying for a concept and paying for intent.

• The three strategic areas where your budget is leaking right now.

• How to build an internal “exclusion architecture.”

The Illusion of Scale in Google Ads Accounts

Google rewards volume because volume spends money. But your P&L doesn’t care about volume — it cares about qualified intent. Without guardrails, the algorithm treats “luxury travel agent” and “cheap travel tips” as the same. They are not the same. One is a buyer. One is a browser.

Here is the uncomfortable truth about the modern Google Ads landscape: Google’s algorithm is fundamentally designed to spend your budget.

It is absolutely not designed to protect your specific profit margin.

The platform aggressively pushes advertisers toward "Broad" targeting, asking you to let the AI decide who sees your ads.

The Misalignment of Incentives

Google’s messaging pushes you toward broad targeting with the promise of “more reach.” But reach without intent is a tax. Your job — or your team’s job — is to protect your budget from Google’s learning curve.

Google’s pitch is always: "You’ll miss out on potential customers if you restrict the algorithm."

The reality is that without tight, strategic guardrails, you pay to show ads to people who differ slightly in syntax but massively in intent.

There is a world of difference between a user searching for "luxury solo travel agent" and one searching for "cheap solo travel tips."

To a loose algorithm, they look similar. To your P&L, one is an investment, the other is a donation.

The Leaky Bucket Audit: 3 Budget Drains

Each drain represents a structural flaw in your account. Fixing them doesn’t require more spend — it requires more precision.

As an advisor, my role isn't just to find winning keywords. It is to build an exclusion architecture that filters out the noise.

For decision-makers looking to tighten up their PPC strategy, you need to understand the three strategic areas where money vanishes.

Drain 1: The Search Term Swamp

This is the most common and fastest leak.

You are bidding on a short phrase, like "marketing audit." The algorithm decides that someone searching for "free marketing audit template" is close enough.

Spoiler: That person is not your ideal high-touch client. They are a DIY tire-kicker.

Your Strategic Fix: Insist your team or agency dedicates time weekly to reviewing the Search Terms Report. They must continuously turn low-intent searches into negative keywords. This stops paying for the concept of your service.

Drain 2: The Location Layer

If you sell high-end services in the US, why are you showing ads to researchers in India or students in Australia?

Often, the default setting is simply set to "Presence or Interest." This means anyone interested in your location can see your ad.

This is fine if you're selling a travel experience, but if you're selling professional services, you want physical presence.

Your Strategic Fix: Check your Geographic Settings. Change the targeting from "Presence or Interest" to "Presence: People in or regularly in your targeted locations." This drastically cuts down on irrelevant global clicks.

Drain 3: The Competitor Black Hole

It’s often tempting to bid aggressively on your competitors' brand names. This is called conquesting.

The problem? It’s usually an expensive fight you can't win.

A user searching for "[Competitor Name] phone number" or "[Competitor Name] login" is already a customer or needs immediate support. They are not shopping for you.

Your Strategic Fix: Be highly selective about conquesting. If you are doing it, only bid on competitor keywords when they are paired with high-intent modifiers like "vs" or "alternatives." Otherwise, your budget is just helping their customer support team.

Quality Over Quantity: The Exclusion Architecture

This is where founders panic. Volume drops. But profitability rises. You’re no longer paying for curiosity — you’re paying for intent.

When we tighten the "shape" of your traffic—restricting the algorithm to only bid on high-intent searches—volume often drops.

That drop can feel scary to a founder focused only on top-line metrics.

But here is the beautiful part: while the volume drops, the profitability usually skyrockets. You are now spear-fishing for decision-makers, not casting a wide net for "awareness."

An Real Client Struggling With Intent

This case study is the perfect illustration: lower volume, higher quality, dramatically better economics.

A while back, I was cleaning up a B2B SaaS account. They were spending a ton on the keyword "data analysis tools."

We paused it and focused solely on "data analysis tools for finance team."

Volume dipped 60%. Conversions dropped 15%. But the cost-per-qualified-lead (CPQL) dropped 75%. That’s a major win. The lower volume was simply better volume.

Practical Takeaway for Marketing Decision-Makers

You don’t need to know every setting. You just need to ask the right questions — and demand the right data.

You don’t need to know every technical setting inside your Google Ads account. You just need to be able to ask your team the right questions.

The litmus test is simple:

"Are we paying for the concept of our service, or the intent to buy it?"

If your team can't answer that with certainty and show you the Search Term data to back it up, your budget is leaky.

You need predictive insight, not just a monthly spend report.

Key Takeaways

• Google’s algorithm is designed to spend your budget, not protect your margins.

• Broad targeting treats wildly different intents as “close enough.”

• Most accounts leak money through search terms, location settings, and competitor bidding.

• Weekly negative keyword reviews are non‑negotiable.

• Location targeting must be set to Presence for service‑based businesses.

• Conquesting only works when paired with high‑intent modifiers like “vs” or “alternatives.”

• Lower volume often leads to dramatically higher profitability.

• The right question isn’t “How much traffic?” but “How much intent?”

Ready to Stop Funding Google’s Ads Learning Curve?

I work with a select group of consultants and service leaders to turn their ad accounts from leaky buckets into predictable revenue engines.

This requires a strategic, not tactical, fix. We build an exclusion architecture designed for profit from day one.

If you are a CMO or decision-maker evaluating bringing ads in-house, my $750 Google Ads Audit is the perfect starting point. I provide a deep review with a recorded walkthrough, giving you the full picture of where your budget is actually going.

You can learn more about that (or my 90-Day Build & Train Program) right here.

(P.S. If you want more no-fluff, profit-focused insights sent directly to your inbox, hop onto my email list—I promise not to send you generic marketing garbage.)