Targeted by role, not by interest
AI and ML engineers, technical decision makers, and founders at companies that specify their own hardware. Job function and seniority rather than an interest in technology, which catches everyone.
UNIBRIGHT SOLUTIONS · CASE STUDY
LinkedIn at Half the Cost of Google — 32 Senior B2B Leads on a $231 Budget
LinkedIn delivered 32 senior B2B leads at $7.20 each — half the cost of Google on the same account, in the same month — from about $231 of spend.
2x
CHEAPER THAN GOOGLE
$7.20
COST PER LEAD
32
B2B LEADS
6.5%
CLICK TO LEAD
01 / THE PROBLEM
The Problem
The client builds custom AI workstations and high-performance PCs. The buyers who matter are not consumers — they are AI and machine learning engineers, research institutions, and companies specifying hardware for a team.
Almost all the budget was going to Google. That works for people already searching for a custom PC, but it does not reach the engineer at a healthcare company who needs a workstation and has not started looking yet. Search only finds demand that already exists.
LinkedIn is where that buyer can be reached by role. The obstacle is cost: LinkedIn is widely regarded as the expensive channel, and most advertisers try it, see the cost per click, and go back to Google.
REVIEW
What Our Review Found
One clear offer built for one product
The campaign sold AI workstations specifically, not the full product range. A focused offer to a focused audience is what keeps the cost per lead down.
Lead gen forms rather than a landing page
The form is filled in on LinkedIn with details already pre-populated. It typically converts at two to three times the rate of sending people to a website, because nothing has to load and nothing has to be typed.
A small budget, spent narrowly
About $231 for the month. The audience was small enough that a larger budget would have reached less relevant people, not more of the right ones.
Leads reviewed for quality, not just counted
Every lead was checked against the target profile rather than handed over as a list of names.
05 RESULT
The Results
RESULT
DETAIL
Half the cost of Google
$7.20 per lead against $14.40 on Google, same client, same month
32 B2B leads
From about $231 of spend
6.5% click-to-lead rate
Within the normal 6–13% range for LinkedIn lead gen forms
$0.47 per click
Roughly a tenth of what the same click costs in US and European markets
71,971 impressions
A deliberately narrow audience, shown to repeatedly
Senior roles in the pipeline
Including a partner at a Big Four consultancy, an AI engineer at a US healthcare company, and a director at a national training provider
MEANS
What This Means
LinkedIn was not the expensive channel here
It came in at half the cost of Google on the same account in the same month, which is the opposite of what most advertisers expect.
Reaching people by job title changes who you get
Search brings whoever is looking. Role targeting brings the person who signs off on the purchase, whether or not they have started shopping.
Lead quality is the real argument
Thirty-two leads is a small number. Thirty-two leads including senior technical and decision-making roles at large organizations is a pipeline.
Small audiences do not need big budgets
About $231 was enough. Spending more would have loosened the targeting, not improved it.
The form matters more than the creative
Pre-filled forms remove nearly all the friction. That single format choice does more for cost per lead than most creative testing.
FIX
What This Does Not Fix
Worth being straight about:
Scale
This audience is small by design. LinkedIn will not replace Google for volume, and it was never meant to.
Speed
These are considered purchases by people who were not actively shopping. The sales cycle is longer than a search lead.
Lead handling
A pre-filled form is easy to complete, which means intent varies. These leads need qualifying before anyone gets excited.
Continuous delivery
The budget ran out during the month and the ads stopped. On a channel this efficient, a gap in funding is a gap in pipeline.
WORKS
Why This Works Elsewhere
About That $7.20 — Read This Before You Compare
The figure looks impossible next to published benchmarks. Industry data puts LinkedIn lead gen forms at roughly $45 to $120 a lead, with one 2026 dataset averaging $58. At $7.20, this campaign sits far below all of them.
The reason is the market, not a trick. This campaign targeted Canada, where a LinkedIn click cost about $0.47 against $5 to $8 in the different location. The conversion side was entirely ordinary: 6.5% of clicks became leads, comfortably inside the normal range for this format.
So the number that transfers to a US campaign is not the $7.20. It is the ratio. LinkedIn delivered leads at half the cost of Google on the same account, in the same month, with a more senior audience. That relationship holds wherever you run it; the absolute cost will follow your own market.
Cheap clicks, ordinary conversion. Expect the ratio to travel. Do not expect the dollar figure to.
Any business selling something technical or expensive to a specific job title has this shape of problem. Search only reaches people who have already decided to look, and for a considered purchase that is a fraction of the market.
The answer is to target the role, make one focused offer, use the format with the least friction, and keep the audience small enough that every rupee reaches someone who could actually buy.
NEXT STEP
The Next Step
Tell us which job titles buy what you sell. We will build the audience, the offer and the form around those roles, start with a small budget, and report on lead quality rather than lead count.
"
Services Provided:
LinkedIn Ads, B2B audience strategy, Lead gen form design, Offer and creative development, Lead qualification, Reporting