Growth Proposal - April 2026

Demand is here.
The system to
scale it is not.

This is not a demand issue. Glo Pals is not struggling because people don't want the product. It's struggling because the system converting that demand is fragmented, and at this stage, inefficiency scales as fast as growth.

130%YoY growth
2.27%Conv. rate
$48AOV
60%Q4 revenue
Glo Pals
Glo Pals
Glo Pals
Glo Pals
Andrew Lamping
A note from Andrew
Hagan, thank you for the opportunity to look at Glo Pals in detail.

We spent real time going through Meta, Google, your conversion data, and what's working today. There's a lot here that's already strong. 130% year-over-year growth, a differentiated product, strong brand loyalty, and clear seasonal demand.

The opportunity is not adding more tactics. It's building the system that can actually compound what's already working. Right now, both channels are performing, but they're not built to scale efficiently. There's revenue already in the account not being captured.

If we have the chance to work together, you'll be working with a team that takes this seriously. We stay grounded in the data, we focus on outcomes, and we put real care into the work.

Thank you again for considering us.

Andrew Lamping
Founder and CEO, Cyclone Social
Where things stand

Proven demand.
System gaps.

You've already proven people want this product. The issue isn't getting attention. It's turning that attention into a scalable system. Right now, the infrastructure capturing and converting demand is fragmented - and at this stage of growth, that fragmentation costs more than most brands realize.

Strong growth trajectory. 130% year-over-year growth, ≈50,000 light-up books sold since October, Sesame Street partnership secured. Demand is validated.

Traffic is increasing but conversion is under-optimized. Sessions up 77%, but 2.27% conversion rate means revenue is being left on the table with every new visitor.

Paid media is working but structurally inefficient. Google campaigns are competing with themselves. Meta has no retargeting layer. Both channels are capturing demand, not scaling it.

This is not a demand problem. This is a system problem.

Meta structure

The current use of Advantage+ campaigns is directionally correct, but the way they're structured is limiting performance.

Meta has shifted away from audience-driven optimization toward creative-driven optimization. Advantage+ works best when it's fed clear signals and a high volume of creative variations. Right now, neither is happening.

Specific issues we're seeing:

  • Campaign structure is fragmented and cluttered - for example, the ADV+ Princess campaign has 6 ads with 4 different concepts, which means Meta can't learn what's actually working
  • Dynamic Creative ads are taking all the spend, which is a signal to consolidate into that format for proper testing
  • UGC/talking head content exists but got zero spend - clear creative with strong signals is getting ignored because of structural issues
  • Testing audiences and creative simultaneously makes it impossible to isolate what drives performance

As a result, the system lacks clarity. Instead of accelerating performance, Advantage+ is amplifying inefficiencies. Right now, Meta is being asked to optimize inside a system that isn't giving it clear signals. That doesn't just slow performance. It makes scaling unpredictable.

Additionally, there are no dedicated retargeting campaigns in place. While Meta does some implicit retargeting within its system, it does not replace a structured funnel. This means high-intent traffic is consistently leaving without being recaptured.

What This Means

This is not a demand issue.

There is clear interest and engagement. The limitation is how the system is structured to capture and convert that demand.

Right now, Meta is not being given the inputs it needs to scale effectively:

  • not enough creative volume per concept
  • not enough testing clarity - too many variables changing at once
  • no defined retargeting layer

What Changes

The focus is not on replacing Advantage+.

It's on rebuilding the system around it so it can actually perform. This includes:

  • Consolidating to 2-3 campaigns maximum: one testing campaign (clean concept isolation), one retargeting campaign, then scaling campaign as winners emerge
  • Shifting to Dynamic Creative format across the board since that's where Meta is already sending the spend
  • Testing one concept at a time with multiple creative variations - not mixing 4 different concepts in a single campaign
  • Activating UGC/mom talking head content with proper structure so it actually gets spend and signal

When these pieces are aligned, Advantage+ becomes significantly more effective and scalable.

Google structure

Two Performance Max campaigns targeting the same products with different ROAS targets, which causes them to compete against each other. The search campaign mixes branded keywords (which inflate performance) with broad-match general keywords (which waste budget).

A significant portion of your Google spend is capturing demand you already own. Most spend goes to branded search - people already searching for Glo Pals - which means you're paying for demand you'd likely capture organically.

That's not growth. That's expensive protection.

Q4 dependency

60% of revenue happens in Q4. This seasonality is not inherently a problem, but it means Q1-Q3 systems need to be operating efficiently to support aggressive Q4 scaling. Right now, the foundation is not optimized for that.

What needs to change
01

Google needs to stop competing with itself

Consolidate Performance Max, separate branded search, use phrase/exact match for efficiency.

02

Meta needs retargeting and clearer creative testing

Launch retargeting campaigns, increase creative volume per campaign, test concepts not just variations.

03

Creative needs to send clear signals

Every ad must tell Meta who it's for, what it is, and why it matters. Unclear = wasted spend.

04

Conversion rate needs focused improvement

2.27% → even modest gains mean significant revenue lift at current traffic levels.

How we handle this

Three systems.
One engine.

Growth here isn't about more spend. It's about aligning creative, media, and conversion into a system that compounds. Paid media, creative, and conversion optimization running together as one cohesive acquisition engine.

Acquisition Engine + Creative Engine + Conversion Engine
ENGINE 01

Acquisition Engine

Paid media structured for scale.

+

Google:

  • Consolidate Performance Max into one campaign or split by product category (books vs. water toys)
  • Separate branded search campaign to protect brand traffic efficiently
  • Launch general keywords campaign with phrase/exact match for intentional reach
  • Eliminate broad match waste and internal competition

Meta:

  • Consolidate to 2-3 campaigns max: testing campaign (one concept at a time), retargeting campaign, scaling campaign for proven winners
  • Shift to Dynamic Creative format since that's where Meta is already directing spend
  • Test single concepts with multiple creative variations - no more mixing 4 different angles in one campaign
  • Activate UGC/mom talking head content with proper structure so it gets spend
  • Launch dedicated retargeting layer immediately to recapture high-intent traffic

Both channels are working. They're just not built to scale efficiently. This fixes that.

ENGINE 02

Creative Engine

High-volume testing system.

+
Meta reads creative first. Every ad must clearly signal: who it's for, what it is, and why it matters.
If the creative is unclear, Meta guesses. Guessing leads to unstable delivery and wasted spend.
  • Test one concept at a time with multiple creative variations - gifting angle, sensory play, educational benefit tested in isolation
  • 5-10 creative variations per concept to give Meta clear learning signals
  • Creative direction aligned with Meta's optimization system (audience clarity, product clarity, trust signals)
  • Weekly testing cadence with fast cuts and aggressive scaling of winners
  • UGC/mom talking head content activated properly so it gets spend and testing

The goal is not more ads. The goal is clearer signals so Meta can optimize efficiently.

ENGINE 03

Conversion Engine

Shopify optimization.

+
  • Audit current conversion funnel and identify drop-off points
  • Provide strategic direction on site improvements (not execution - we don't code Shopify)
  • Recommend timing for external Shopify expert once we understand the full picture
  • Optimize product pages, checkout flow, and trust signals

We don't replace a Shopify developer. But we know what moves conversion, and we'll audit your site early to give you a clear roadmap before you bring in external help.

SYSTEM LAYER

Decision Layer

Reporting built around business outcomes.

+
  • Track blended CAC as the north star - not just platform ROAS
  • Monthly narrative reporting (not dashboard dumps)
  • Clear view of what scales, what stalls, what changes
  • Quarterly planning with full strategic team

The goal is more total revenue at the same CAC. Monthly meetings translate data into action. No slides for the sake of slides.

This only works if all three parts are connected. Otherwise, performance becomes fragmented.

What this looks like for you

First 30 Days
  • Consolidate Meta to 2-3 campaigns: one testing (single concept isolation), one retargeting, one scaling as winners emerge
  • Shift to Dynamic Creative format and activate UGC content with proper structure
  • Launch dedicated retargeting layer to capture high-intent traffic that's currently leaving unconverted
  • Consolidate Google Performance Max and separate branded search to eliminate internal competition
  • Complete site audit with conversion-focused recommendations ready for your dev team
Days 30-60
  • Scale winning creative concepts aggressively while cutting underperformers fast
  • Begin phrase/exact match Google campaigns targeting intentional search behavior
  • Deliver first conversion optimization implementation (quick wins your team can execute)
  • Stabilize blended CAC and establish clear benchmarks for Q4 scaling

This isn't a 90-day ramp. We move fast because the foundation is already there - we're fixing structure, not starting from scratch.

What working together looks like

Four phases.
Clear ownership.

Phase 01

Rebuild

Days 1-30: Fix structure before scaling.

  • Google restructured, branded search separated
  • Meta campaigns simplified
  • Retargeting launched
  • Creative testing framework active
Phase 02

Test

Days 30-60: Find what drives performance.

  • High-volume creative testing running weekly
  • Concept-level tests in market
  • Shopify audit delivered with recommendations
  • Performance data consolidating
Phase 03

Scale

Days 60-90: More behind what works.

  • Budget shifted to proven winners
  • Retargeting efficiency maximized
  • First QBR with full team
  • Q4 prep begins
Phase 04

Optimize

Beyond 90 days: Strengthen and expand.

  • Q4 scaling strategy locked
  • Creative system fully operationalized
  • Quarterly planning rhythm active
  • System operating at peak efficiency

Typical week

This is an active system. We are not setting and waiting.

Early week +
  • New creative concepts briefed and developed - each testing a specific angle
  • Campaign performance from prior week reviewed; underperformers flagged for cuts
Mid-week +
  • Creative delivered for approval via Slack - approved work goes live same day
  • Budget shifted toward winners; new ad sets launched based on early signals
Ongoing +
  • Live campaigns checked daily - spend, ROAS, frequency, creative fatigue monitored
  • Underperformers cut; budget moved to what's working
Weekly call +
  • Short sync with Emily - focused on decisions, not recap of numbers
  • We come prepared with clear point of view on what changes and why
  • Paid performance and any creative decisions pending
  • Approvals needed for week ahead
  • Any strategic pivots or opportunities
Weekly

Quick and tactical

Approvals and decisions. Fast and focused.

Monthly

A conversation, not a report

What moved. What it means. What changes.

Quarterly

Planning with the full team

Last 90 days reviewed. Next 90 decided.

You should feel momentum within weeks, not months.
We can start in approximately two weeks from acceptance. Onboarding begins immediately during that window so we're ready to move fast once officially launched.

You are not managing us. You are approving direction and staying informed.

Launching at scale without bottlenecks.

Case Study.

“It never felt like we hired an agency. It felt like we added an in-house marketing team that actually drives things forward.”

$4.7M
Sales from four product launches in one summer
4 launches
Back-to-back without bottlenecks or overlap
Daily tracking
Real reporting tied to profitability, not vanity ROAS
Case Study - American Cornhole Association

$4.7M IN SALES FROM FOUR PRODUCT LAUNCHES IN ONE SUMMER

The American Cornhole Association is the largest producer and seller of cornhole products in the world. As the official governing body of the sport, they set the standard for both players and fans. Summer is their peak season, and going into it they set an ambitious goal: launch four new product lines back to back, sustain momentum all season, and nearly double sales.

This was new ground for ACA. They had introduced new products before, but never a coordinated sequence at this scale. Each line required its own positioning and creative: Versatex All-Weather Boards built like Trex decking for durability, NXT Bags with waterproof coatings and reflective technology, Gold and Silver Series boards designed for professional-level play, and Synergy Edge technology bags created for advanced push and block shots.

  • Each line required its own positioning and creative
  • Timing had to sync with merchandising and inventory
  • Leadership wanted accountability beyond surface-level ROAS
  • Needed reporting that captured acquisition costs, margins, Shopify fees, shipping, and fulfillment
ACA needed more than a marketing campaign. They needed a launch engine that connected strategy, creative, email, ads, and reporting into one system.

We designed a launch system that moved with intention and connected every piece of the funnel.

  • Sequenced Launches: Mapped a campaign calendar that stacked four product launches back to back, with each rollout building momentum into the next
  • Full-Funnel Campaigns: Ran Meta, TikTok, and Google ads targeted to each product release, driving to custom landing pages supported by Klaviyo email and SMS flows
  • In-House Creative Production: Planned and produced all campaign content internally, from photography to video ads, with every asset created for performance
  • Cross-Team Coordination: Worked directly with ACA's merchandising department to align product availability, timing, and content needs
  • Real Reporting and Accountability: Built calculators that factored in every cost - acquisition, margin, Shopify fees, shipping, fulfillment - with daily tracking and weekly reviews
$4.7M
Sales over four months, nearly double the original goal
4 launches
Major product lines launched successfully without bottlenecks
Repeatable
System now used for future collections and brand partnerships
Daily tracking
Clear visibility with reporting tied to real business outcomes
ACA's record-breaking summer was not the result of one great ad or one strong product. It was the product of an intentional system. Each launch was connected, each channel supported the others, and every decision was backed by both data and common sense.
Logan

“It never felt like we hired an agency. It felt like we added an in-house marketing team that actually drives things forward.”

Logan Bronkema - Brand Director, American Cornhole Association

How $8,000/month compares

In-House Hire
$8-10k/mo
  • Salary: $50-60k/year
  • Benefits & taxes: +$1.5k/mo
  • Equipment/software: +$400/mo
  • Office overhead: +$300/mo
You get: One generalist covering everything. Limited depth in paid media, creative, or strategy.
Traditional Agency
$10-12k/mo
  • Base retainer: $6-8k/mo
  • 15-20% of ad spend
  • Creative production extra
  • At $17k spend: ~$10-12k
You get: Junior account manager, rotating creative, limited strategic access.
BEST VALUE
Cyclone
$8,000/mo
  • Founder oversight (Andrew)
  • Paid Media Director (Eric)
  • Creative Director (Wes)
  • Account Manager (Emily)
  • + Strategist, PM, creative team
You get: Full specialist team. No % until $60k+ spend.
Why Cyclone

Built for this stage of growth.

Cyclone does not operate like a traditional agency. Most teams manage channels. Cyclone builds the system that makes those channels perform.

Growth at your stage isn't about more ads or more budget. It's about aligning creative, media, and conversion into a system that compounds. Platforms perform based on inputs, not effort. When those inputs are unclear, performance becomes unpredictable.

This is exactly the type of problem Cyclone is built to fix: fragmented account structure, low creative volume, no retargeting layer, inefficient Google spend, and a Q4 dependency that requires everything to be dialed in before scaling season hits.

You don't need a vendor managing campaigns. You need an embedded partner who understands how these systems actually work, moves fast, owns outcomes, and operates at the same pace you do.

Inc 5000
Google Partner
Meta Business Partner
If helpful, here's a deeper look at how we operate
Investment

One flat monthly partnership.

We structure this to align with growth. As performance scales, our involvement deepens, not just our fee. The goal is not just to "manage ads." It's to build a system that captures more of the demand that already exists, improves efficiency as spend increases, and creates consistency heading into Q4.

Core Growth Engagement
$8,000 /mo

Flat monthly partnership

This includes
  • Full management of Meta and Google Ads
  • Account restructuring to support efficient scaling
  • Creative direction and testing framework aligned with performance
  • Ongoing optimization based on business-level metrics (not just platform metrics)
  • Strategic guidance to support growth across channels
  • Monthly narrative reporting
  • Quarterly business review with full team
Scaled Support Calculator

As monthly ad spend scales beyond $60k, campaigns become significantly more complex. Higher budgets require more aggressive creative testing, tighter daily monitoring, faster optimization cycles, and more strategic oversight to maintain efficiency at scale.

The scaled support fee (10% on incremental spend above $60k) ensures our team's capacity matches the increased complexity and keeps incentives aligned as we grow together.

Average Monthly Ad Spend: $17,000
$5k $60k (threshold) $150k
Monthly Partnership Fee: $8,000
Scaled Support Fee (10% over $60k): $0
Total Monthly Investment: $8,000

Your current spend: With your current monthly ad spend of $16-17k, you're well below the $60k threshold where scaled support would apply. You'll pay the flat $8,000/month partnership fee only.

Optional - Organic + Email Support
+ $2,000 /mo

Only available when bundled with core engagement

How this works with your in-house social media director:

Your social director stays focused on high-level strategy: marketing calendars, brand voice, themes, and sales focuses. We become their execution arm - providing the content team, post planning/creation/scheduling, analytics, influencer negotiations, community management, and a team to bounce ideas off of. They lead, we execute. It's how all our clients operate.

What you get:
  • Content team for creation, planning, and scheduling
  • Influencer outreach, negotiations, and relationship management
  • Community management and response handling
  • Analytics and performance reporting
  • Strategic partnership with your in-house marketing lead
  • Email strategy and optimization support

Led by Bob Phillipp (Director of Organic Marketing). Consider adding this in month 2-3 once paid campaigns are stabilized.

Ad spend is separate and passes directly to Meta and Google. We recommend maintaining current spend levels during the rebuild phase, then scaling incrementally once retargeting audiences develop and creative testing produces clear winners.

Your team

People working
on this daily.

Andrew leads strategy. Eric owns paid. Emily is your day-to-day contact. Everyone else runs a defined part of the system. Select anyone to learn more.

Andrew
Andrew Lamping
Founder & CEO
Learn more →
Ryan
Ryan Smith
Director, Marketing Ops
Learn more →
Emily
Emily Hoffman
Senior Account Manager
Learn more →
Eric
Eric Hall
Director of Paid Media
Learn more →
Wes
Wes Teska
Creative Director
Learn more →
Joey
Joey Lamping
Paid Ad Strategist
Learn more →
Jada
Jada Shaw
Project Manager
Learn more →
Bob
Bob Phillipp
Director of Organic Marketing
Learn more →
Full audit breakdown

Supporting evidence.

The detail behind the diagnosis. Each section follows the same structure: what it looks like, what is actually happening, and why it matters.

Meta Ads
CRITICAL
Significant restructuring needed
What it looks like
  • Four Advantage+ campaigns running simultaneously
  • Inconsistent audience targeting across ad sets
  • 3-4 creatives per ad set (should be 5-10+)
  • No retargeting campaigns
  • No dynamic product ads (DPA)
What is actually happening

Testing is happening, but it's testing audiences and creative simultaneously, which makes it impossible to isolate what's actually working. Most creative variations are minor tweaks within the same concept rather than concept-level tests. Meta is not getting strong enough signal to optimize efficiently.

Why it matters

Without clear signal and proper retargeting structure, budget increases will produce diminishing returns. Every warm visitor leaving unconverted is wasted prospecting spend.

Scorecard
Campaign Structure25/100
Creative Testing30/100
Retargeting0/100
Dynamic Product Ads0/100
Budget Allocation55/100
Creative Direction50/100
Detail

No retargeting layer exists. Every dollar is targeting cold audiences. People who have visited the site, viewed products, or added to cart are leaving the funnel without any paid follow-up. This is the single largest opportunity.

Creative volume is too low. Each ad set has 3-4 creatives when they should have 5-10+ to give Meta proper signal. Most variations are executional tweaks within the same concept rather than different angles being tested.

Audience overlap and confusion. Multiple ad sets are targeting similar audiences with slightly different restrictions, which causes internal competition and confuses Meta's optimization.

Some strong creative exists. The product is inherently visual and differentiated, which is a creative advantage. The structure around it just needs to be built properly.

How we would fix this
  • Launch retargeting campaigns immediately for site visitors, product viewers, add-to-cart
  • Set up dynamic product ads (DPA) to show people the exact products they viewed
  • Consolidate campaigns for cleaner audience segmentation
  • Increase creative volume to 5-10 per campaign with concept-level tests
  • Implement Meta creative SOP: clear audience signals, product clarity, trust signals in every ad
Google Ads
CRITICAL
Significant restructuring needed
What it looks like
  • Two Performance Max campaigns targeting same products with different ROAS targets
  • One search campaign mixing branded + non-branded keywords
  • All keywords on broad match
  • Branded search (Glo Pals) eating most of the budget
  • Limited by budget despite clear demand
What is actually happening

The two Performance Max campaigns are competing against each other for the same products. The search campaign shows great metrics, but that's because branded keywords (people already searching "Glo Pals") are inflating performance. Broad match keywords are triggering on irrelevant searches and wasting budget. Campaigns are limited by budget because there's so much search volume, but much of that volume is inefficient.

Why it matters

You're paying for demand you'd likely capture organically (branded search), and you're paying for irrelevant traffic (broad match). Google looks like it's working because the overall ROAS is strong, but underneath, there's significant waste and internal competition.

Scorecard
Campaign Structure30/100
Keyword Strategy25/100
Budget Efficiency50/100
Match Type Usage20/100
Campaign Separation30/100
Detail

Performance Max campaigns competing with themselves. Two campaigns targeting the same products but with different ROAS targets (580 vs 294) will inevitably compete in the auction. This creates inefficiency and makes it impossible to understand true performance.

Branded keywords inflating search performance. "Glo Pals" branded keywords are grouped with general keywords like "sensory toys" and "light up bath toys." Branded search gets most of the budget and shows strong ROAS, but you're paying for traffic you'd likely get organically.

Broad match causing waste. All keywords are broad match, which means Google is showing your ads for loosely related searches. High search volume categories like "sensory toys" and "kid toys" need phrase or exact match to be intentional about what you're showing up for.

Clear demand exists. Campaigns are limited by budget, which means there's real search volume. The structure just needs to be fixed to capture that demand efficiently.

How we would fix this
  • Consolidate Performance Max into one campaign OR split by product category (books vs water toys)
  • Create dedicated branded search campaign to protect brand traffic efficiently
  • Launch general keywords campaign with phrase/exact match for "sensory toys," "light up bath toys," etc.
  • Break ad groups into separate categories (sensory toys, light up cubes, bath buddies) for better control
  • Eliminate broad match waste and internal competition
Ready when you are

If this is the
direction, let's
build it right.

The gaps are identified. The plan is clear. The only variable is when we start.

Direct line to Andrew
Our goal is simple: run this in a way that makes performance clear, scalable, and easy to trust.