New Videos 2026 — Landing Page View Campaigns

Each video was given its own ad set with its own daily budget — $15.00/day split three ways in Whistler, $7.50/day split three ways in Squamish. That is deliberate. In the June engagement flight Meta was left to choose, and it pushed roughly 95% of the money at one video within days, which tells you what the algorithm likes but not how the others would have done. Forcing the split costs a little efficiency and buys a clean read.

Everything except the video is identical across the three ads: same ad copy, same Learn More button, same link to sierraservices.ca, same placements, same audience. So any difference below is the creative, not the setup.

These are landing page view campaigns, so Meta is optimising for people who click and wait for the site to load. That is a harder, more meaningful action than a click, and it is the same objective the Spring Clean-up campaigns ran on — which is what makes the comparison further down fair.

Whistler is again the stronger of the two audiences, though the gap is narrower than it was on the engagement flight. Whistler bought a page view for $0.752 against $0.855 in Squamish, on a link click-through rate of 1.95% versus 1.56%. Squamish impressions are slightly cheaper ($12.25 CPM vs $13.45), so the difference is not the cost of reaching people, it is how many of them act.

The Spring Clean-up campaigns ran on the same objective and the same optimisation goal (landing page views) but for far longer — 70 days in Whistler and 91 days in Squamish, against 8 completed days here. Comparing totals would just be comparing flight lengths, so every figure below is each campaign's first 8 delivery days. Cost-per-result and rate figures are budget-independent, which matters because Whistler is now running three ad sets at $15.00/day where the spring campaign started on one at $5.00/day.

The new videos work the impression harder. In Whistler they pulled 17.9 page views per 1,000 impressions against 10.6 in the spring, and in Squamish 14.3 against 11.6. Click-through is up in both towns, and the share of clicks that actually became a loaded page went from about 80% to over 91% — fewer people tapping and bailing before the site appears.

But the impressions themselves cost more now. CPM is up roughly 40% in Whistler and 24% in Squamish versus March. Mid-July is a more expensive auction in a resort town than a shoulder-season March. That is why Whistler's cost per page view still improved a useful 17%, while Squamish came out essentially flat: the better creative response was cancelled out by the pricier auction.

The single best landing page view creative in the account is still a spring one. Spring Clean-up V3 in Whistler delivered page views at $0.544 across its full flight ($0.501 in its first 8 days) — ahead of anything in this test. It is a service-menu montage with star ratings and a "Trusted Across Sea to Sky" proof card, which is a different job to the new brand films: it tells you what is on offer and why to trust it, in 24 seconds, with an obvious reason to click. Two different jobs: a clear offer earns the click cheaply, a brand film earns the attention.

Matching on days is one choice; matching on money spent is another, and the two can disagree. They do not here. Whistler is running $15.00/day against the spring campaign's $5.00/day, so equal days is not equal spend — but re-cut against the spring campaign's first $136 of spend rather than its first 8 days, the creative response barely moves (+68% against +69%).

The baseline that does change the answer is maturity, not method. Against its first days the spring campaign looks beaten; against its whole flight it does not — it finished at $0.739 a page view in Whistler, slightly ahead of the $0.752 we are seeing now. That is a fair thing to hold us to, with one caveat: a campaign gets better as it runs, and that one had 70 days to learn plus its strongest creative (V3) added part-way through. This flight is 8 days old and still learning. The honest read is that the new videos are ahead of where the spring campaign was at the same age, and have not yet had the run to prove they finish ahead of where it ended.

One handicap sits on the new side, and we cannot size it. This flight runs three ad sets where the spring campaign ran one. Each ad set therefore learns on a third of the data, and all three bid for the same people in the same auction. That is the price of getting a clean read on the creative, and it means the new videos are being compared on a slightly harder setting than the spring campaign faced — if anything the numbers above understate them.

Why the rate column is the one to trust. Cost per page view is exactly CPM ÷ page views per 1,000 impressions — an auction price divided by a persuasion rate. The auction price is the season and the competition, and nothing about the creative changes it. The rate is the part the video actually controls, and it is up on every baseline above.