How much time should I budget?

About 3 hours total, a working session and a review call. We do the heavy lifting.

What if I only want the roadmap, not the build?

That's the Campaign Repositioning Sprint. Ship it yourself, or upgrade to Done-For-You later.

Do you interview my customers?

Optional. We can mine your call recordings, reviews, and won/lost notes instead.

B2B teams spending $20K+/mo on ads whose demos aren't converting.

Book a 30-minute call. We'll tell you straight if it's a fit.

Where Lokalise's ads lose the buyer

Lokalise is running 18 live ads on LinkedIn and Google. Their average fit to their own ideal buyer is 7.7 out of 10, and 2 ads need fixing. Each ad below is one of Lokalise’s real live creatives, read straight from the ad libraries.

Lokalise’s live ads, scored against their buyer

Every market gets your brand, not a translation of it, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Specific proof point ('50% higher quality than ChatGPT alone') elevates a strong brand-voice hook above generic localization claims.
Multilingual releases without the dev queue, scored 9/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Scenario-specific headline plus '75%+ less dev involvement' stat hits the dev-queue bottleneck pain dead-on with real proof.
Stop maintaining localization plumbing, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. 'Build versus buy' frames the exact make-or-buy decision engineering leads face, backed by 200+ integrations and a clear demo CTA.
Keep release velocity in all your languages, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Sharp dev-pain hook plus 75% proof and clear CTA lands well for engineering and localization buyers.
More markets without more engineering, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Roadmap-cadence framing hits the PM and engineering pain directly, and '4 weeks to under 2 days' is a concrete proof point.
Product, docs, and training in sync across locales, scored 9/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Named customer proof, sharp dev-role hook, quantified outcome, and a clear CTA make this the strongest execution in the set.
Launch every market on the same day, scored 7/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Marketing-buyer angle is on-ICP and '75% faster' is credible, but the body stat combo feels slightly repetitive across the set.
The platform for high-velocity global growth, scored 5/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Aspirational brand framing and vague 'Language Market Fit' concept lack the workflow specificity the ICP buyer needs to act.
Scale every language without scaling spend, scored 7/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Scale and cost angle is on-ICP and '80% savings vs human translation' is a strong proof point, though the hook is less sharp than peers.
Cut the cost and turnaround of every release, scored 6/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Cost-efficiency message is relevant but '20% lower costs' is the weakest proof number in the set and the body copy is abstract.
Make every surface as multilingual as your AI, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Named-account personalization plus the AI-gap tension in the text line creates a sharp, timely hook for a software ICP buyer.
Localization that ships when your features do, scored 9/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Named pain plus 75% dev reduction stat plus real integrations makes this the strongest click trigger in the set.
Every market gets your brand, not a translation of it, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Quality differentiator vs ChatGPT alone is a sharp, timely proof point for brand-voice-conscious buyers.
More markets without more engineering, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Concrete before-and-after stat, 4 weeks to under 2 days, lands the release-bottleneck pain precisely for PM and eng buyers.
Scale localization without breaking your stack, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. 80% savings vs human translation is a hard number that directly addresses duplicated spend, the CFO and localization manager pain.
Localization as launch infrastructure, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. Days-not-weeks framing plus 75% dev reduction and dev-tool integrations shown covers speed and engineering pain well.
Faster campaign turnaround in every market, scored 7/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. 75% faster turnaround is solid proof but the campaign-content angle narrows to marketing leads, leaving eng and PM buyers cold.
Scale localization without breaking your stack, scored 8/10 against Lokalise’s ideal buyer. 80% savings stat with a clear CTA is a strong cost-reduction hook, identical creative to ad 3 but with the CTA more prominent.

See Lokalise’s full live-ad board on AdRoast. Every creative scored against their ICP, with the exact fix for each.

Learn the method behind these scores: the AdRoast guides cover how to audit your ads against your ICP and why clicks do not turn into pipeline.