Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Short-term (< 3 months)
When I first started working with startups on their acquisition strategies, I thought I was being smart by testing multiple channels simultaneously. Facebook ads, Google ads, LinkedIn outreach, content marketing, email campaigns—you name it, we were running it.
Three burned marketing budgets later, I realized I was making the classic mistake every growth person makes: spreading resources too thin across channels instead of actually understanding what works.
The problem isn't that founders don't know about the bullseye method or channel testing frameworks. The problem is they're asking the wrong question. Instead of "how many channels should I test?" they should be asking "how do I test channels without losing my shirt?"
After working with dozens of B2B SaaS clients and e-commerce stores, I've learned that the magic number isn't about channels—it's about depth over breadth. Here's what you'll learn from my expensive mistakes:
Why testing multiple channels simultaneously kills your ability to learn
The "one channel rule" that saved my clients thousands in wasted ad spend
How to identify your true acquisition channel (not what you think it is)
When to add a second channel (and how to do it right)
My framework for channel testing that actually produces learnings
This isn't theory—this comes from watching clients burn through marketing budgets and then helping them rebuild their acquisition strategy the right way. Let's dive into why most traction frameworks miss the point.
Industry Reality
What Every Growth Guide Tells You
Walk into any startup accelerator or open any growth marketing blog, and you'll hear the same advice repeated like gospel: "Test multiple channels to find what works for your business."
The conventional wisdom goes something like this:
Cast a wide net: Try 5-7 different acquisition channels simultaneously
Allocate budget equally: Give each channel the same time and money
Measure everything: Track metrics across all channels for comparison
Double down on winners: Scale the channels that show promise
Kill the losers: Cut channels that don't perform
This approach exists because it sounds logical. Why wouldn't you want to test everything at once? It feels efficient, data-driven, and reduces the risk of missing out on a golden channel.
The problem is that this conventional wisdom was designed for companies with massive marketing budgets and dedicated teams for each channel. When Google or Facebook tests channels, they have entire departments with specialized expertise and millions to burn.
But here's what happens when startups follow this advice: You end up with seven mediocre experiments instead of one that actually teaches you something. You're not just testing channels—you're testing your ability to execute across multiple fronts with limited resources.
The real issue? Attribution becomes impossible. When someone converts, you can't tell if it was the Facebook ad they saw, the LinkedIn post they engaged with, or the email sequence that finally convinced them. Your "data-driven" decisions are based on incomplete data.
Most importantly, testing multiple channels simultaneously prevents you from learning the most crucial lesson: what actually makes your specific audience convert. Instead of understanding deeply why one approach works, you're skimming the surface of everything.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
The lesson hit me hard when I was working with a B2B SaaS client who had exactly this problem. They came to me frustrated because they'd been "testing" five different channels for six months with mediocre results across the board.
Looking at their setup, I found the classic multi-channel disaster: Facebook ads sending traffic to a generic landing page, Google ads pointing to their homepage, LinkedIn outreach directing people to their product demo, content marketing funneling to a newsletter signup, and cold email campaigns pushing for direct sales calls.
Each channel was getting enough budget to exist but not enough to truly optimize. Their Facebook ads were getting 50 clicks per day—not nearly enough data to iterate on creative. Their Google ads were targeting 20 different keywords with minimal budget per keyword. Their content was publishing twice a week but with no clear conversion goal.
The real revelation came when I dug into their analytics. Most of their "direct" traffic—which they weren't attributing to any channel—was actually coming from people who had been following the founder's personal content on LinkedIn. But because they were spreading their attention across five channels, they'd never noticed this pattern.
Here's what I discovered: The founder had been sharing insights about their industry problems on LinkedIn, building trust over time. When people were ready to buy, they'd remember the founder's name, search for the company directly, and convert as "direct" traffic.
Meanwhile, they were spending thousands on Facebook ads trying to convert cold traffic with the same message that was working organically on LinkedIn. The difference? Trust and context. LinkedIn provided both; Facebook ads provided neither.
This client taught me that the question isn't "how many channels should I test?" The question is "how do I identify which channel is actually driving my best customers?" Sometimes your best channel isn't the one getting credit in your attribution reports.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
After that eye-opening experience, I completely changed how I approach channel testing with clients. Instead of the spray-and-pray method, I developed what I call the "One-Channel Framework"—a systematic approach to finding and optimizing your best acquisition channel before adding complexity.
Step 1: The Channel Audit
Before testing anything new, we audit what's already working. I pull data from the last 6 months and look for patterns most founders miss:
Direct traffic spikes (often indicates offline or unmarked online activity)
Referral sources that convert better than others
Organic social engagement that correlates with signup increases
Email open rates and click patterns by source
The goal isn't to find the biggest channel—it's to find the channel with the highest quality engagement. Quality beats quantity every time in the early stages.
Step 2: The Focus Decision
Once we identify the most promising channel, we make a commitment: 60 days, one channel only. No exceptions, no "quick tests" on the side, no FOMO about missing opportunities elsewhere.
This isn't just about budget allocation—it's about mental bandwidth. When you're only focused on one channel, you can actually learn its nuances. You understand the difference between good and great performance. You iterate faster because you're not context-switching between platforms.
Step 3: Deep Channel Optimization
Here's where the magic happens. Instead of testing 5 channels poorly, we test 5 different approaches within one channel:
Different audience segments
Multiple creative approaches
Various landing page treatments
Different offer structures
Alternative conversion goals
For one e-commerce client focused on Facebook ads, this meant testing creative approaches over audience targeting. We discovered that lifestyle-focused content vastly outperformed product-focused ads for their audience—a insight we never would have found while splitting attention across multiple channels.
Step 4: The Profitability Test
After 60 days of focused testing, we have enough data to answer the crucial question: "Can this channel profitably scale to our target volume?"
If yes, we continue optimizing. If no, we document the learnings and move to the next most promising channel. But here's the key: we don't add the second channel until the first one is either clearly working or clearly not working.
Step 5: Strategic Channel Addition
Only after we've proven one channel works do we add a second. And we add it strategically—not as a test, but as a complement to our proven channel.
For example, if LinkedIn personal branding is working, we might add LinkedIn ads to amplify reach. If content marketing is driving conversions, we might add email nurture to improve conversion rates. The second channel supports the first, rather than competing for attention.
Resource Allocation
Focus 80% budget and time on one channel until it's optimized or ruled out
Attribution Clarity
Single-channel focus eliminates attribution confusion and reveals true conversion drivers
Learning Velocity
Deep channel knowledge beats surface-level multi-channel dabbling every time
Strategic Scaling
Add complementary channels only after proving your primary channel works
The results of this focused approach consistently surprise clients. Instead of mediocre performance across multiple channels, they get clarity and direction.
With the B2B SaaS client I mentioned earlier, focusing exclusively on LinkedIn personal branding led to a 300% increase in qualified leads within 60 days. More importantly, they finally understood their actual acquisition engine: the founder's expertise and thought leadership.
An e-commerce client who had been splitting budget between Facebook, Google, and influencer partnerships saw their Facebook ROAS jump from 2.1 to 4.8 when we focused entirely on creative testing within that single channel. The key insight? Their audience responded to user-generated content over professional product photography—something we discovered only because we had enough budget to test comprehensively.
But the most valuable result isn't metrics—it's strategic clarity. Clients finally understand what type of marketing their business needs. Some discover they're built for content-driven growth. Others find their strength in paid acquisition. Some realize their best "channel" is actually their product itself through referral programs.
This clarity becomes the foundation for everything else: hiring decisions, budget allocation, product development priorities, and even fundraising narratives. When you know what drives your business, every decision becomes easier.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
After implementing this framework with over 30 clients, here are the key lessons that apply universally:
Attribution lies, but focus reveals truth: Multi-channel attribution is often wrong, but single-channel focus shows clear cause and effect
Depth beats breadth in early stage: Better to be excellent at one thing than mediocre at many
Your best channel might not be obvious: Often it's something you're already doing that you haven't recognized or optimized
Context matters more than content: The same message performs differently across channels based on user intent and platform context
Resource constraints force creativity: Limited budget on one channel leads to better optimization than unlimited budget spread thin
Learning compounds within channels: Each optimization builds on the previous one when you're focused
Team alignment improves with focus: Everyone understands the strategy when there's only one channel to master
The biggest mistake I see is founders treating channel testing like a science experiment when it's actually more like learning a language. You don't become fluent by studying seven languages simultaneously—you master one, then add others.
If you're currently testing multiple channels, my advice is simple: pick your most promising one and pause everything else for 60 days. The opportunity cost of not finding your optimal channel is much higher than the risk of missing out on alternatives.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups specifically:
Focus on channels where you can demonstrate expertise and build trust over time
Prioritize channels that allow for educational content and thought leadership
Consider your sales cycle length when choosing test duration (B2B needs longer)
Don't test paid channels without proven organic traction first
For your Ecommerce store
For e-commerce stores specifically:
Start with channels that allow visual product demonstration
Test creative approaches over audience targeting within your chosen channel
Focus on channels where buying intent is already high
Consider seasonality when planning your 60-day focused tests