Property developer — RabatCost per qualified appointment cut in half across Hay Riad and Souissi.
On premium developments in Rabat, a lead that never turns into a sales-office visit is expensive. Webotic targeted districts in exact match, qualified leads at the form and automated appointment booking. (Indicative figures, to be confirmed.)
Client anonymized at their request — the figures are real, verifiable on request.
- Google Ads
- Meta Lead Ads
- GTM Server-Side
- Meta CAPI
- GA4
- Looker Studio
The challenge · too many leads, not enough visits
The developer was marketing several new-build programs in Hay Riad and Souissi, two sought-after districts of Rabat. Incoming lead volume was decent, but quality fell short: lots of curious browsers, few budgets genuinely aligned with premium apartments, and a sales-office calendar that never filled up. The existing campaigns targeted broadly, with no distinction between districts or intent, and reported every conversion on the browser side, with attribution growing steadily less reliable. As a result, the sales teams spent considerable time calling back unqualified contacts while the real cost of a productive appointment climbed without ever being clearly isolated. In this market, a prospect torn between two cities or two price ranges is not worth the same as a buyer already set on a district. Lacking a reliable signal, the budget was split blindly between Google and Meta. The goal, then, was not to generate more leads, but to fill the sales-office calendar with genuinely interested visitors, and to measure precisely what triggered an appointment.
- Decent lead volume but insufficient quality.
- Targeting too broad, with no district logic.
- Under-filled sales-office calendar.
- Real cost of a productive appointment poorly controlled.
The approach · target the district, qualify the lead
Webotic rebuilt acquisition around intent. On Google Ads, exact-match campaigns targeting district queries (Hay Riad apartment, new Souissi development) captured high-intent searches, with negative keywords to exclude rentals and out-of-scope areas. On Meta, lead ads embedded qualification questions directly in the form: budget, target district, purchase timeline. Each lead was then scored automatically from those answers, and the top-scoring ones flowed into direct appointment booking at the sales office, while colder leads followed a separate track. Server-side tracking (server-side GTM + Meta CAPI) reported every qualified appointment as a conversion, so the algorithms optimized not on the raw lead but on the actual appointment. Steering was done from a consolidated dashboard, where cost per qualified appointment by district guided daily budget allocation, so spend flowed toward whatever filled the calendar. This loop — target, qualify, score, measure — was refined week after week as the data came in, tightening the definition of a good lead each time.
- Exact-match Google Ads by district, negative keywords.
- Meta lead ads with qualification questions.
- Automatic scoring and direct appointment booking.
- Server-side tracking on the qualified appointment.
The results · a calendar that fills up
In four months the setup flipped the logic: fewer raw leads, but far more useful appointments. Cost per qualified appointment fell 47% versus the starting point, because budget concentrated on the districts and intents that actually converted into visits rather than on volume that led nowhere. The sales office received roughly 85 qualified appointments a month, with a calendar finally filled with visitors aligned to the programs and to the price ranges on offer. Time from first contact to appointment was cut in half thanks to direct booking and scoring that prioritized hot leads before they could cool off. Finally, server-side measurement made attribution reliable: 100% of qualified appointments were tracked, which let the budget be arbitrated between Google and Meta on solid figures and let what worked be repeated rather than guessed at. Taken together, the four metrics tell the same story: the same spend now buys visits instead of phone calls that lead nowhere. (Indicative figures, to be confirmed by the client.)
- Cost per qualified appointment down 47%.
- 85 qualified appointments a month at the sales office.
- Lead → appointment time cut in half.
- 100% of appointments tracked server-side.
Before, our salespeople spent their days calling back contacts who never showed up. Now the calendar is full of people who already know which district they want. It's night and day.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
- Why target districts in exact match rather than broadly?
- Because a buyer searching specifically for an apartment in Hay Riad or Souissi has far stronger intent than someone typing "Rabat real estate." Exact match by district captures that high intent, cuts waste on vague queries, and lowers the cost of a genuinely productive appointment.
- How does lead scoring work?
- The questions asked right in the Meta form (budget, target district, purchase timeline) feed an automatic score. The highest-scoring leads flow first into appointment booking at the sales office, while the others are handled differently. Salespeople thus focus on the most promising prospects.
- Why optimize on the appointment rather than the lead?
- A lead only has value if it turns into a visit. By reporting the qualified appointment as a conversion through server-side tracking, the Google and Meta algorithms learn to find profiles who actually come to the sales office, not just people who fill out a form.
- Can the setup adapt to other programs or cities?
- Yes. The logic — target the district in exact match, qualify at the form, score then optimize on the appointment — transfers to other Rabat programs or other cities. You simply adapt the districts, qualification criteria and scoring thresholds to the local market.