---
title: Scallon Quality Score Issues — Landing Page Optimization (2026-01-07)
type: article
created: '2026-01-07'
updated: '2026-01-07'
source_docs:
- raw/2026-01-07-weekly-call-w-gilbert-112453107.md
tags:
- google-ads
- quality-score
- landing-page
- scallon
- impression-share
- rsa
- optimization-score
- gilbert-barrongo
- mark-hope
layer: 2
client_source: Quarra Stone
industry_context: b2b-services
transferable: false
---

# Scallon Quality Score Issues — Landing Page Optimization (2026-01-07)

Reviewed during the [[wiki/meetings/2026-01-07-weekly-call-gilbert|2026-01-07 Weekly Call with Gilbert]]. Scallon's campaigns are losing significant impression share due to low Quality Scores, traced to below-average Expected Click-Through Rate (eCTR) — a symptom of poor landing page experience.

## Problem Summary

Scallon's Google Ads campaigns are underperforming on impression share despite having adequate budget. The root cause is low Quality Scores across keywords in the retirement/senior living campaigns.

**Key metrics observed:**
- Quality Scores: **4–5 out of 10** across most keywords
- Impression share loss: majority lost **due to rank**, not budget
- Budget utilization: spending roughly **half** of the $75/day budget
- Optimization score: **54%** (well below the >80% target)
- RSA headlines in use: **9 of 15** available slots filled
- Descriptions in use: **3 of 4** available slots filled
- Sitelinks in use: **2 of 5** available slots filled

## Root Cause Analysis

Google's Ad Rank formula: **Ad Rank = Quality Score × Bid**

A low Quality Score forces higher bids to win the same auction position — or results in losing auctions entirely. The diagnostic breakdown for Scallon's keywords showed:

| Component | Status |
|---|---|
| Expected Click-Through Rate (eCTR) | **Below average** |
| Ad Relevance | Average |
| Landing Page Experience | (implied below average) |

The eCTR being below average while ad relevance is only average points to the **landing page** as the primary drag. A good ad is sending traffic to a landing page that doesn't convert or signal relevance to Google's quality systems.

> "We've got a good ad going to a bad landing page. That's what's happening here." — Mark Hope

## Actions Taken (2026-01-07)

- Identified low Quality Scores (4–5/10) across retirement campaign keywords
- Reviewed optimization score (54%) and identified specific RSA gaps
- Applied Google-recommended keywords including "senior care near me" and "best nursing homes near me"

## Action Items

- [ ] **Gilbert:** Flag landing page quality issue to the Scallon account manager — frame it as the primary lever for impression share recovery
- [ ] **Gilbert:** Expand RSAs to full capacity — add headlines to reach **15**, descriptions to **4**, sitelinks to **5**
- [ ] **Gilbert:** Apply all eligible Google optimization recommendations to push optimization score above **80%**
- [ ] **Account Manager:** Prioritize landing page improvements for retirement/senior living campaign targets

## Strategic Context

### Why Quality Score Matters More Than Bid

Improving Quality Score from 5 to 6 has the same Ad Rank effect as a 20% bid increase — at zero additional cost. For a client like Scallon where budget is not the constraint (impression share loss is rank-driven, not budget-driven), landing page and RSA work is the highest-leverage optimization available.

### Optimization Score as a Proxy for eCTR

Mark's guidance: maintaining an optimization score above 80% is a reliable way to keep eCTR competitive. Filling all RSA asset slots (headlines, descriptions, sitelinks) directly contributes to this score and gives Google's algorithm more material to find high-performing combinations.

## Related

- [[wiki/knowledge/google-ads/quality-score-fundamentals|Quality Score Fundamentals]]
- [[wiki/knowledge/google-ads/new-campaign-bid-strategy|New Campaign Bid Strategy (Maximize Clicks Bootstrap)]] — related issue surfaced for Bluepoint same call
- [[wiki/clients/current/scallon/_index|Scallon Client Overview]]