How Becker.dk Stopped Treating 800,000 Products Equally — and Turned Google Ads into a Profit Engine
Jacob Thyssen
Founder
1. The Objective — What did the client actually need?
Client: Becker.dk
Industry: Auto Parts (E-commerce)
Market: Denmark
Business goal:
Scale revenue and profitability by pushing the right products at the right time.
Real objective:
Make Google Ads profitable and scalable despite extreme complexity from a 800,000+ product catalog.
The Client's Specific Challenge
Becker.dk had over 800,000 products active in Google Ads.
The problem was not traffic.
The problem was not demand.
The problem was:
How do you stay profitable when everything is competing for budget?
- Too many products
- No clear prioritization
- Budget spread across high and low performers equally
The Gap: Volume ≠ Profitability
Revenue existed, but:
- Spend was leaking across low-performing products
- High-margin and best-selling products were not pushed aggressively
- The account lacked control over where money was actually going
Reality Check
Google Ads was contributing — but it was not the primary growth driver.
The opportunity
With the right structure, Becker.dk could:
- Become dominant on Google Ads
- Leverage strong USPs like better delivery times and competitive pricing
- Turn Google into their largest revenue channel
What We Set Out to Achieve
Primary Objective:
Build a system that:
- Prioritizes profitable products
- Aligns with real search behavior
Scales revenue without sacrificing efficiency
Personal Note
Most accounts don’t fail because of lack of demand.
They fail because everything is treated the same.
2. The Growth Barrier — What was stopping performance?
Before working together, growth was limited by:
– No control across a massive product catalog
– No prioritization of profitable products
Why Performance Was Stuck:
Barrier 1: No Product Prioritization
Symptom:
800,000+ products competing equally
Impact:
Budget diluted → profitable products underfunded
Barrier 2: Misalignment with Search Behavior
Symptom:
Product titles didn’t reflect how people actually search
Impact:
Missed high-intent searches → lower CTR and conversions
Barrier 3: Weak Search Structure
Symptom:
Broad targeting with limited segmentation
Impact:
Low control → inefficient spend
Personal Note:
If you don’t decide where the budget goes, Google will.
3. The Strategic Shift — Why did we change the approach?
Instead of “optimizing campaigns,”
we built a system around profitability, control, and relevance.
Previous Approach (Limitations):
- Broad campaigns targeting generic auto parts
- Feed used as static input, not strategy
- No prioritization of products
- Search lacked precision
Strategic Framework (Our Approach):
1. Product Prioritization at Scale
We structured 800,000+ products based on:
- Profitability
- Demand
- Performance
This allowed us to:
- Push best-performing SKUs
- Reduce wasted spend
- Control scaling
2. Search-Driven Feed Optimization
Key insight:
People don’t search:
“brake disc”
They search:
“brake disc BMW 3 series 2018”
So we:
- Expanded titles with brand + model compatibility
- Added it at the end to keep titles readable
- Matched products to real search behavior
Result:
- Higher relevance
- Better matching
- More qualified traffic
3. SKAG-Based Search Structure
We rebuilt search using single keyword ad groups:
- One keyword → one ad group
- One intent → one landing page
- One message → one ad
Before:
- Broad targeting
- Generic ads
After:
- Precise targeting
- High relevance
- Full control
4. Demand Mapping
We:
- Identified what users actually search for
- Mapped top-selling products to those searches
- Built campaigns around real demand, not assumptions
Personal Note:
We didn’t try to control everything.
We controlled what mattered.
4. The Transformation — What did we actually change?
Account improvements:
Structured 800,000+ products into performance-based segments
Shifted budget toward profitable SKUs
Reduced spend on low-performing areas
Conversion improvements:
- Aligned product titles with real search queries
- Increased match quality across Shopping and Search
- Built highly relevant SKAG campaigns
Guiding principle:
Push what works. Cut what doesn’t.
5. The Impact — What changed for the business?
| KPI | Before | After | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google Ads Revenue | €100,000/month | €400,000+/month | 4x growth |
| ROAS | 6.0 | 9.35 | +56% |
| Product Efficiency | Uncontrolled | Structured | Better scaling |
| Search Relevance | Low | High | Higher conversions |
Business outcomes:
Google Ads became a primary revenue driver
Revenue scaled without losing profitability
Budget allocation became controlled and intentional
Scaling became predictable
6. The Takeaway — Why this matters
Most accounts never scale profitably.
Not because of lack of products.
Not because of lack of demand.
Because:
- There is no prioritization
- There is no alignment with search behavior
- There is no control
Closing note
If you manage a large product catalog and Google Ads feels harder to scale than it should, the issue is rarely the number of products.
It usually comes down to prioritisation and structure.
More Case Studies
How We Helped Scanfarma Achieve +200% Growth in 14 Months
- +200% revenue growth in 14 months
- Boosted revenue by 235% with Google Ads
How Accent Clothing Recovered Up to 51% of Misallocated Google Ads Spend and Increased ROAS from 1.95 to 8.37 in 5 Months
- Recovered up to 51% of misallocated ad spend
- Increased ROAS from 1.95 to 8.37 in 5 months