In short
Three engagements is a thin evidence base. We are publishing what they contain and stopping there, rather than padding it into a guide.
What they do show is that reach on the platform is genuinely cheap, and that reach and leads are not the same purchase.
The three
| Business | Budget | Documented outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Car shop | $800/mo | 26.7M video views, 21.3M impressions, 1.58M clicks at 5.94% CTR on $7,961 across ten months |
| Conservation project | $600/mo | 158 leads at $11.67 on a total spend of $620, five weeks |
| Furniture discount store | $1,000/mo | Strong view, reach and impression figures alongside lead volume |
What the car shop engagement does show
The car shop campaign is the substantial one: 21.3 million impressions and 1.58 million clicks at a 5.94% click-through rate, on $7,961 across ten months. A click-through rate near 6% is far above what the same money buys on search or Meta.1
What the write-up does not record is what those 1.58 million clicks were worth. That is the honest limit of this piece: we can evidence extraordinary reach at low cost, and we cannot yet evidence what it converted to. Anyone telling you otherwise from three campaigns is guessing.
What we would need before recommending it broadly
- Conversion data, not engagement dataViews are the easy part of this platform.
- More than one sectorA car shop, a safari reserve and a furniture retailer do not establish a pattern.
- A longer windowFive weeks tells you about a creative, not about a channel.
Sources
- Car Shop: 26.7M views and 1.58M clicks at 5.94% CTR. Monastic Marketing case study. Read September 29, 2026.
- Conservation Project: five weeks on a total spend of $620. Monastic Marketing case study. Read September 29, 2026.