Your Google Ads look fine. That's the problem.

Most brands I talk to say the same thing. "Our ads look good. We just need better targeting." And I get it. Targeting feels like the smart lever. Creative feels like the pretty part you hire someone for and then forget about.

Sometimes targeting really is the issue. Wrong audience, wrong geo, wrong bid strategy. Fine. Fix that. But a lot of the time the creative is the leak and nobody wants to admit it because the ads "look professional." Clean layout. Correct brand colours. Nice product shot. Logo in the corner. And then the numbers are mid and everyone blames the algorithm.

I've designed Google Ads for supplements brands, clinics, agencies, property leads, the lot. And I keep seeing the same pattern. The file looks fine in Figma. It looks fine in the ad preview. It still doesn't stop anyone. Or it gets the click and the person lands on a page that feels like a different company. Bounce. Money gone.

Here's the uncomfortable bit. "Looking fine" is not the job. The job is interrupting someone who did not ask to see your brand today, in half a second, and making the offer so obvious they don't have to think. If they have to decode what you're selling, you've already lost.

Lead with the deal

If your price, discount or offer is buried under a lifestyle photo and a soft headline, you're designing for a portfolio, not for Google Display. People on those placements are mid scroll, mid browse, mid something else. They're not sitting there studying your brand story. So put the deal up front. Big. Readable on a phone in daylight. Clear benefit next to it. Product after that. Brand last if you have to choose.

I know some brand managers hate this. Feels salesy. Feels loud. Cool. Loud converts more often than quiet and pretty. You can still make it look sharp. Sharp and clear is the goal. Quiet and vague is just expensive wallpaper.

One idea, three sizes

Square, landscape, portrait. Same message. Same hierarchy. No weird crops where the price gets cut off in one size. No "we'll fix the tall one later" layouts. If your media buyer has to open Photoshop at 11pm because the 960x1200 version looks broken, the creative already failed before it went live.

When I ship a set, I design the idea once and stretch it across the sizes on purpose. Same offer language. Same proof points. Same visual system. That way the account isn't running three different ads that happen to share a logo. It's one idea, ready for wherever Google puts it.

Test like you mean it

I don't do random A/B. Random A/B is how you end up with "variant B won" and zero learning. Offer-first vs product-first. Lifestyle vs pack shot. Soft claim vs hard price. One big change at a time. So when something wins, you actually know why and you can build the next set from that.

Also stop testing tiny stuff first. Button colour can wait. If the hook is weak, the button never mattered. Fix the thing the thumb sees in the first half second, then refine.

And please match the landing page

I've redesigned homepages just because the ads promised one thing and the page felt like a different brand. That gap kills CPA harder than a slightly ugly banner. If the ad shouts a big discount or a hard offer, the page better say it again, loud, above the fold, with the same energy. Same product. Same promise. Same next step.

Think of the ad and the page as one conversation. The ad starts it. The page finishes it. If the voice changes mid sentence, people leave. They're not being dramatic. They're protecting their time and their card.

Pretty is optional. Clear is not. If your Google Ads "look fine" and still don't convert, send me the creatives. Happy to tell you what's weak. No fluff, no 20 slide deck. Just what's broken and how I'd fix it.