Greystar Properties
96% occupancy in the hardest markets, on 40% less ad spend.
96%
Occupancy achieved on properties well below target
136%
Increase in leads
40%
Reduction in required monthly ad budget
<$20
Per lead, beating client benchmarks
The Challenge
Greystar needed leases. A select group of properties in difficult markets were sitting well below occupancy, several still in lease-up.
The mandate was simple and unforgiving: fill the units, and don't overspend to do it.
The Approach
We treated occupancy as the only metric that mattered and cost per lease as the constraint. That meant relentless attention to where every dollar went.
We rebuilt the paid search program around efficiency, ran aggressive analytics on what was actually converting to tours and leases, and optimized continuously rather than on a reporting cycle.
The Work
- 01Rebuilt and managed paid search across a portfolio of underperforming properties
- 02Continuous budget reallocation toward the markets and properties with the most urgent occupancy gaps
- 03Aggressive ongoing testing and optimization on targeting, creative, and bidding
- 04Analytics focused on lead-to-lease quality, not raw lead volume
Results
- 96% occupancy on some of the portfolio's most difficult properties
- 136% increase in leads
- Cost per lead held under $20, below the client's own internal benchmarks
- Required monthly advertising budget reduced 40% over the life of the contract
- Consistent client feedback that lead quality was high and costs were better than any internal benchmark
Occupancy problem, or a spend problem?
Most programs solve one by making the other worse. We filled the hardest properties in the portfolio while cutting the budget it took to do it, because we optimized toward leases instead of leads. If your numbers only work when you spend more, let's talk.
Start a conversation