A "bait-and-switch" PPC strategy targeting competitor brand keywords (Zumex and Zumo) to intercept high-intent searchers who are already in the market for commercial citrus juicers. The approach capitalizes on the fact that Zumex and Zumo have strong brand awareness while Citrus America does not — meaning many potential buyers are searching for competitors without knowing Citrus America exists as an alternative.
This strategy was discussed and approved during the [1].
"I'm 100% positive they Googled Zumo and Zumex. I just don't think we gave them an opportunity to learn about us."
— Brian Framson
When a category leader has strong brand recognition but a challenger does not, competitor keyword targeting can be highly effective. The dynamic here differs from a Coke-vs-Pepsi scenario (where both brands are equally known and buyers are brand-loyal) — instead, a buyer searching "Zumex juicer" is primarily looking for a commercial juicer, not specifically Zumex. That makes them interceptable.
This is especially relevant during trade show season, when competitor awareness peaks and buyers are actively researching equipment purchases.
| Campaign | Target Keywords | Destination |
|---|---|---|
| Zumex | zumex, zumex juicer, zumex orange juicer, zumex juice machine, zumex versatile pro, zumex essential pro |
Zumex competitor landing page |
| Zumo | zumo juicer, zumo orange juice machine |
Zumo competitor landing page |
Why separate? Keeping campaigns distinct allows granular budget tracking and performance comparison. Combining them into a single "competitor" bucket obscures which brand is driving results.
Why not just "zumo" as a broad keyword? Zumo has significant non-juicer search volume (e.g., "Zumo sausage," "Frank Zumo"). Broad targeting wastes spend on irrelevant clicks. Use specific qualifiers like "zumo juicer" to filter intent.
Zumex is cleaner — no meaningful brand collision exists, so broader keyword matching is safer there.
Each campaign drives to a dedicated competitor comparison landing page that:
The Zumex landing page was already built. The Zumo landing page was in Figma review as of this meeting.
No overall budget increase. Reallocate a portion of the existing "Commercial Juicer" campaign budget to fund the new competitor campaigns. Rationale: the Commercial Juicer campaign showed no measurable conversions and was described as "nebulous." Redirecting that spend toward higher-intent competitor traffic is a better use of the same dollars.
Once GCLID tracking is in place and conversions can be attributed to specific campaigns, the business case for increasing total PPC spend becomes straightforward.
Without capturing Google Click IDs (GCLIDs) in HubSpot form submissions, it is impossible to connect ad clicks to leads and sales. The current state — where form submissions show only as "organic" or "referred" — means there is no ROI visibility and no justification for budget increases.
The fix is a hidden GCLID field on all HubSpot forms. Once in place:
See [3] for implementation details.
From the call, using SEO/PPC research tools:
Suggested starting CPC bid: ~$0.25 (low, to avoid unexpected spend spikes while validating traffic quality). Raise bids incrementally as performance data accumulates.
Citrus America ran competitor keyword campaigns previously but let them go stale and eventually paused them. Early results were described as "fairly good" even without dedicated landing pages. The current plan improves on that baseline with: