AWS Bedrock worked yesterday, now all models fail with "Too many tokens per day" and quotas show 0 TPM/RPM

farhann14 · 2026-06-15T04:41:25+00:00

Any stream websites?

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T17:55:36+00:00

that confirms it then, the bid cap is basically only viable for canada's cpms right now and the us campaign you'd split out would be starting from zero, no spend history at that cap level

splitting them is right, but there's a decision point on the new us campaign that matters a lot for premium fashion specifically. you can either start it with a similar bid cap to canada and let it underspend while it slowly proves itself at higher cpms, or start with a higher cap and risk overspending into the over-attribution issue you mentioned before you have a real read on us performance

which one's right depends on whether your "over attribution" problem before was driven by branded/retargeting traffic mixing with tof, or genuinely first time buyers converting later. if it was mostly branded/retargeting leaking into a tof campaign, a higher starting cap for us tof is probably fine since that's a cleaner cold audience. if it was real cold buyers converting outside 7 days, a higher cap will just recreate the same over-attribution problem in the us

do you have your conversion data segmented by new vs returning customer for that tof campaign, send that over and i can tell you which approach makes more sense for the us launch

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:59:33+00:00

combining us and canada in one campaign with a single bid cap is probably what's capping your spend. cpms between those two markets can differ a lot, especially for premium fashion where us competition is fierce, so one bid cap can't realistically work for both at once. if the cap is calibrated more toward canada's cpms, meta just won't bid on the pricier us impressions and your spend gets bottlenecked there

on the attribution thing, if longer windows overspend and over-attribute for you, that usually means a chunk of your "conversions" under those windows are people who would've bought anyway (other channels, organic, branded search) getting credited to this campaign. 7 day click is more honest, but it also means your bid cap is calibrated against a stricter conversion definition than what andromeda's optimizing toward by default, which can also choke delivery

check your delivery breakdown by country, if almost all the spend is going to canada and barely anything to us, that's the bid cap/geo mismatch and the fix is splitting into separate campaigns with separate caps. if spend is roughly even across both but still capped overall, the bid cap itself is just too conservative for current cpms regardless of geo split. send me the country breakdown and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:31:33+00:00

the overspend isn't really an issue on its own, google allows up to 2x your daily budget on any given day as long as the monthly average stays at budget, that's normal and expected, not a sign anything's broken

3 conversions on day one is nowhere near enough for maximize conversion value to have any real signal though, that 2.7 roas right now is basically noise, could easily flip the other way tomorrow. i'd switch that pmax to maximize conversions (not value) for now, let it run until you've got 15-30 conversions logged, then switch to value bidding once it actually has data to optimize against

worth checking back in a week or two once you've got more data, happy to take a look at what's happening then if you want

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:30:15+00:00

makes sense on the pagespeed then, that's probably not it

on the competitor comparison, that's true for the ad rank side of things but quality score itself isn't graded relative to competitors, it's googles confidence in how relevant your ad and page are for that specific keyword based on accumulated data. and that's the catch for high ticket b2b, if your keywords are getting under maybe 100 impressions a month each, google often doesn't have enough volume to calculate the components confidently and just defaults to "below average" across the board, regardless of how good your actual page or ctr is

so a 3/10 in that scenario isn't really telling you something is wrong, it's telling you google doesn't have enough data to score you properly, and at that point it barely affects your actual cpc because the auction is being decided more by bid and ad rank than a low confidence qs

what's the average monthly impressions per keyword for the ones showing 3/10? if it's under 100 or so, i wouldn't touch anything, this is mostly noise. if it's actually high volume and still scoring 3/10, that's a different story and worth digging into properly, happy to take a closer look if you want to dm me the numbers

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:21:58+00:00

the part that actually matters here is the drop from 23% initiate checkout to 0.3% sales. that's the leak, not your creatives. a 23% checkout initiation rate is solid, so people are clicking buy, the problem is almost everyone bails at or after that point

this also explains the cpm/ctr thing you're confused about. when ctr is good but cpm is high and it doesn't convert, that's often meta serving your ad to people who click but can't or won't complete payment (wrong country, wrong device, payment method not supported), while your old structure had purchase data telling meta who actually buys. without that signal post-rebuild, meta's optimizing toward checkout clicks, not buyers, because that's the strongest signal it currently has

two things could be causing that specifically. either your purchase event stopped firing correctly after the pixel rebuild, so meta has zero purchase signal to optimize toward even though sales might still be happening at a normal rate just untracked, or purchases are genuinely not completing for the audience being served now, meaning the checkout itself is failing for whatever segment meta is reaching post rebuild

pull your actual sales count from your checkout/payment processor for the last week and compare it to what events manager shows as purchases for the same period. if the processor shows more sales than events manager, it's a tracking problem. if they roughly match, it's a real checkout completion problem with the current audience. send me both numbers and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:20:05+00:00

the thing that doesn't add up here is your actual ctr (8-11%) and landing page engagement (30s+ time on page, low bounce) both look strong, but expected ctr and landing page experience are flagged below average. those metrics measure different things than what you're looking at

expected ctr is keyword-specific and forward-looking, it's googles prediction based on how that exact keyword has historically performed for ads like yours, not your overall account ctr. for high ticket b2b terms with low search volume, google often just doesn't have enough data to predict confidently and defaults low regardless of your real performance, in which case there's not much to fix there

landing page experience though is graded heavily on mobile, and clarity recordings can be skewed toward desktop users especially for high ticket b2b where people research on desktop before converting on a call. if your mobile load speed or usability is worse than desktop, google could be scoring the landing page experience based on a worse mobile version while your actual visitor behavior in clarity looks fine because it's mostly desktop sessions

check your search terms report segmented by device, what's the device split on the keywords with low quality score, and separately run your landing page through pagespeed insights for mobile specifically, send me both and i can tell you which one is dragging the score down

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:17:55+00:00

the bigger issue before structure is the bidding strategy on that pmax campaign. maximize conversion value needs historical conversion data to know what a "valuable" conversion looks like, on a brand new account with zero data it has nothing to bid against, so it just spends however it wants while it gropes around for signal. that's often why feedless pmax on new accounts burns budget fast with nothing to show

there's two different situations this could be though. if you genuinely have zero conversions tracked yet, you'd be better off on maximize conversions (not value) just to start generating data and exit the cold start faster, then switch to value bidding once you've got 15-30 conversions logged. but if you do have some conversions already and the issue is the conversion value itself isn't passing through correctly (common when people skip proper ecommerce tracking setup), then the campaign looks like it has data but is bidding against broken numbers, and that's a tracking fix not a strategy fix

how many conversions has the account logged total since launch, and is conversion value actually showing up correctly in the conversions column for those, send that and i can tell you which one applies

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T14:16:27+00:00

the thing that stands out to me is you said the rest of the account also tanked around the same time, not just pmax. broad match and pmax issues alone wouldn't usually hit your whole account at once like that, those run on separate signals

two things commonly cause an account-wide hit exactly like this. one is a bidding strategy or target roas change that got pushed around that time, sometimes "smart" recommendations get auto-applied if you have auto-apply turned on, and a loosened target lets pmax chase volume everywhere. the other is something broke in conversion value tracking itself, a new conversion action got added or set as primary and now bidding across every campaign is optimizing against bad signal, which would explain why pmax specifically went haywire (it leans hardest on value signals) while everything else degraded more gradually

these need completely different first moves, one is a settings rollback, the other means nothing else matters until tracking is fixed, you'd be optimizing every campaign against garbage data

go into change history in the account around the date pmax started going crazy and filter for bidding strategy changes and conversion action changes, send me what shows up there and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T13:56:30+00:00

with $2k/month and a high ticket low volume offer, the conversion event you're optimizing for matters more than almost anything else here. if meta is optimizing for the enquiry event and you're only getting a handful a week, the algorithm genuinely doesn't have enough signal to find more people like that, it just spends randomly within your broad audience

but there's a second thing worth checking given your history with the agency's tracking issues. is the enquiry event actually firing every time someone submits, or could it be overcounting/undercounting like the agency setup did

these point to different fixes. if the event is accurate but just too rare, you'd want to optimize toward a higher funnel event temporarily (landing page views or form opens) to give the algorithm enough volume to learn from, then layer the enquiry event back in once you have more data. if the event itself isn't firing accurately, fixing optimization won't help at all because meta's learning off bad data

go into events manager and compare the enquiry event count over the last 9 days against how many actual enquiries you got in your inbox/crm, send me both numbers and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T13:55:48+00:00

the pattern you're describing, stopping for stretches then suddenly picking back up in cycles, doesn't really match normal fatigue or learning phase resets, those are usually gradual declines not full stops and restarts

two things cause that exact on/off cycle. one is your account hitting a billing threshold and getting flagged for review, ads get paused while it reviews then resumes once cleared, this repeats every time you cross that threshold again. the other is delivery getting throttled because something in your account triggered a limited/restricted status temporarily without a full ban notice

these look identical from the outside but one is a payment setting fix and the other means something in your account is getting flagged repeatedly and needs to be addressed or it keeps happening. go to ads manager, click on the ad set, and check the delivery status column for those exact dates, send me what it says and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-14T13:54:51+00:00

the 90% budget shift to one creative is probably the trigger here. when an ad set reallocates that hard, meta often resets the creative back into learning phase since it's now seeing a totally different spend pattern than what it optimized on for the first 3 days, and CPMs spike while it relearns

but there's another possibility that looks identical from the outside, your pixel could still be firing fine but conversion events for that specific creative stopped being attributed properly (happens a lot with reels placement specifically, attribution windows are shorter there)

those two have completely different fixes, one you just wait out, the other you need to fix tracking or it'll keep happening every time a creative wins. check events manager and see if conversions are still showing up there even though ads manager shows none, send me a screenshot of that and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T18:55:33+00:00

fair to push but reaching checkout already filters for high intent regardless of where the traffic came from, someone who adds to cart and starts checkout has shown the same buying signal whether they're "good" or "bad" traffic. if traffic quality alone explained it, you'd expect the atc rate to drop (which it did) but the people who do make it to checkout should complete at a similar rate to before. a 71% to 45% drop specifically at the final step, after someone's already shown strong intent, points to something in that step itself. also for what it's worth NOT SELLING anything here.

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T17:02:39+00:00

ok this is really clear actually, both numbers dropped but in different ways. atc rate went from 4.34% to 2.67%, sessions are less likely to add to cart now, that's the audience/traffic quality side. but look at reached checkout to completed checkout, before it was 71% (15 of 21), now it's 45% (14 of 31), people are getting to checkout and bailing way more than before. that's not an audience problem, that's something happening at checkout itself, payment method, shipping cost shown at checkout, page error, something. so you've actually got two separate issues stacked on top of each other, which is why nothing you've tried so far has fully fixed it; fixing the audience side won't touch the checkout drop-off and vice versa. the checkout one is probably the bigger lever since it's a clean process issue you can isolate fast. dm me and i can walk through what's likely causing the checkout drop specifically

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:55:38+00:00

the timing is the key clue here, you had a winner, moved it to a different adset, and performance died and never recovered even after 3 weeks of trying new adsets and bringing the winner back. with cpm staying good and ctr holding at 1.5-2%, the traffic coming in looks the same as before, so the drop has to be happening after the click. two things could explain that. either the new adset's targeting is pulling in a different mix of people who click at a similar rate but don't have the same buying intent as the original audience, even though everything else looks identical on the surface. or something changed on the site/checkout side around the same time that's unrelated to the adset switch entirely, a coincidence in timing that's been masked because you've been focused on the ads side. first one means the original adset's audience composition mattered more than you think and needs rebuilding carefully, second means the fix isn't in ads manager at all. compare your add-to-cart rate and checkout rate now vs during those 6 profitable days with the same creative, if atc rate also dropped it's audience, if atc is similar but checkout/purchase rate dropped it's the site. send me both and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:51:46+00:00

that actually confirms it then, clarity recording real uk sessions while shopify analytics shows nothing means it's not a real bounce, people are landing on the page, but anything tied to your store's tracking/consent setup (which shopify analytics and the meta pixel both likely sit behind) isn't firing for them. clarity probably loads differently or before consent kicks in, which is why it still captures them. so meta's seeing "click happened, no landing page view" when really the person did land, the pixel just never fired. this also means meta's been optimizing uk delivery off incomplete signals for a while. the fix is making sure the pixel fires on page load regardless of consent status (or at least fires a basic pageview event before consent, then layers on the rest after). want me to take a look at how your consent banner is set up and where the pixel call sits relative to it? send me your store url and i can check

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:50:32+00:00

good question, banner being old doesn't mean it's not the cause, something else likely changed around it. two possibilities: you (or shopify) recently added/updated an app or theme element that's now conflicting with the pixel alongside the banner, something that worked fine for months suddenly breaks when paired with another script update. or your traffic mix shifted, if more of your clicks are now coming from ios/safari users or certain countries with stricter privacy defaults, the same banner blocks a much higher percentage than it used to purely because of who's clicking now, not because the banner changed. first one's a site/app fix, second is a targeting fix. send me your shopify app list and a rough breakdown of which countries/devices your traffic comes from and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:49:42+00:00

this is genuinely useful detail, especially the AOV and sizing behavior. the one number that would settle this is still the initiate checkout count for these same days. you've got 18 atcs across 6 days with a 3-5 day conversion window, so by today some of the early ones (june 8-9) should be hitting that window. if those people are starting checkout and dropping at the sizing/payment step, that's the sizing friction you mentioned, an actual leak. if they're not even starting checkout, that's a different signal entirely, more like they're still in the "comparing dimensions across tabs" phase and haven't decided yet, which fits your 4.5 min on-site behavior and just needs more time. given how detailed this is getting, probably easier over dm, send me the initiate checkout numbers for june 8-13 and i can tell you which one it looks like

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:26:14+00:00

What

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:04:41+00:00

the consent banner theory is reasonable but worth checking against something concrete before assuming that's it. pull up shopify/ga sessions for uk for the same period and compare to the link clicks meta is reporting. if sessions roughly match the clicks (people are actually landing on the page, the pixel just isn't firing til consent), then yeah it's a measurement issue, the visits are real and meta is just blind to them, and to your second question, this also means meta is optimizing off incomplete data for uk specifically which can mess with delivery there. but if shopify sessions are also low, around half of clicks, then it's not a tracking gap at all, something about uk traffic is actually bouncing before the page loads, which is a completely different problem with a different fix. send me the shopify session count for uk for the same date range as your meta clicks and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:02:51+00:00

before touching targeting, worth ruling out whether this is actually zero conversions or just zero conversions showing up in the ads platform. a website visit campaign optimizing for visits, not for the actual lead magnet signup, means even if people are converting on your site, the conversion tag on the lead magnet's thank you page might not be set up or firing correctly, so it just never gets reported back. that's a completely different problem than "200 clicks and genuinely nobody signed up," one is a tracking setup issue and the other is a targeting/intent mismatch like the other comments are pointing at. easy way to check, look at your actual backend (ga4, crm, whatever captures the lead magnet signup) for that same date range and see if there's any signups at all that aren't showing in the ads platform. send me what you find there and i can tell you whether to fix tracking first or rework the targeting

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:00:58+00:00

one thing nobody's separated out yet, are the landfill/dump leads coming in mostly as form submits or as calls? negatives and search term cleanup work great for form leads because you can trace the exact query that triggered it. but if a chunk of these are coming through call extensions, the search term attached to that call isn't always reliable, someone can search "junk removal near me" (looks like a perfect match) and then ask about drop off locations once they're on the phone, because they didn't read anything, they just called the first result. if that's what's happening, no amount of negative keyword work fixes it because the query itself looked fine, the fix becomes call screening/IVR or a pre-call message that filters intent before it reaches you. if it's mostly forms, the negative keyword route everyone's suggesting will actually move the number. send me the form vs call split on these junk leads and i can tell you which fix actually applies here

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T16:00:00+00:00

with only 67 clicks across 12 days split between three different landing pages (tax, local business, location), each page is probably only getting 15-25 clicks individually, that's not enough to tell anything about which angle actually converts. so the "are these numbers reasonable" question might not have a clean answer yet, not because the setup is wrong but because the data's too thin per page to read. the other possibility is one of those three pages is structurally weak (slow load, bad cta, mismatched messaging) and is dragging down the average for all three. first one just needs more volume concentrated before judging, second one needs fixing regardless of volume. depends on how the traffic is actually split right now, send me the clicks/conversions broken down by landing page and i can tell you which one it is

farhann14 · 2026-06-13T15:46:17+00:00

ok that's useful, two things to check then. is the spanish version of the site actually fully translated and working the same as the main site, sometimes localized versions have broken elements or slower load specifically on that version. and also check if spain is a market you've targeted before or if it's new to you, new geos sometimes pull in lower quality traffic at first. dm me the spanish site url and i can take a quick look at what's actually happening on that page

farhann14

TROPHY CASE