Notes for owners · Digital marketing
Choosing between Google Ads, Justdial-type listings and word of mouth for a niche trade
How a small specialist trade can compare Google Ads, directory listings and word of mouth by the cost of a call it actually answered and the quality of the enquiry, not by clicks.
The GullySales team · Updated 17 Oct 2026 · 6 min read
On this page
Picture an invented cleaner of commercial kitchen chimneys in Nagpur who pays for a directory listing, puts a little money into Google Ads, and gets most of the work from one restaurateur's friend. At the end of the quarter the cleaner cannot say which of the three deserves more money. Compare them on one number: what each costs per call you answered and could quote on. Clicks and "leads" counted by a platform are a different thing. In a small trade, the winning channel is often the one with the fewest calls but the most jobs.
Why the click is the wrong thing to count
An ad platform reports clicks. A listing reports "leads", and that word may include someone who tapped your number by mistake or called five providers at once. Word of mouth reports nothing, so it can go uncredited.
None of those figures tells you about your diary. What matters is a short chain: a call came in, you answered it, the caller wanted work you do in your area, you sent a quote, you won the job. Each link loses some people. A channel that looks cheap at the first link can be expensive by the last. The caller who wants a hotel chimney cleaned across town, or wants a price for a home chimney you do not service, is a call but not an enquiry.
What each channel does to the quality of the enquiry
| Channel | Who calls | Strength | The usual trap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google Ads | Someone who typed what you do plus a place, right now | You choose the words, the area and the hours | Paying for calls when nobody picks up; paying for job seekers and people who want a product price |
| Directory listing | Someone browsing a category, often comparing | Quick to be visible in a new area | The same caller may phone several providers, so you start in a price contest |
| Word of mouth | Someone who was told your name by a person they trust | Often a good fit with less haggling | It stops at the size of your past customer list, and you cannot switch it on |
Ads reward a narrow setup. If you clean only commercial kitchens in Nagpur and the towns around it, say so in the settings. Switch the ads off outside the hours you answer. Then watch the search terms report for words that bring the wrong people, such as home chimney or job vacancies. Google Ads is the related service.
A listing suits a trade where the buyer is in a hurry and has no name in mind. It suits a trade where the work is designed around the buyer much less. If the caller may have phoned a rival first, ask: "Have you spoken to anyone else yet?" The answer tells you whether this is a price check.
Word of mouth is often the best-fitting source, and the one you cannot switch on. You can help it along, though. Ask at handover, put a line on the invoice, and send the customer a short message a few days later. The post on building a referral programme goes further.
The register that settles the argument
Keep one sheet, one row per channel, filled in as calls arrive. Four columns do the work.
- Money spent on the channel while the test ran.
- Calls you answered, not calls shown.
- Real enquiries: the work is something you do, in a place you serve.
- Jobs won.
Then divide. Spend by calls answered gives your cost per answered call. Spend by real enquiries gives your cost per enquiry. Spend by jobs gives what a job cost to find. Record the source on the first call by asking "How did you find us?" and writing the answer down before you forget it.
For example: a kitchen-chimney cleaner in Nagpur
The cleaner and the figures below are made up for illustration. The cleaner spends ₹6,000 on a listing and ₹9,000 on ads. The listing shows 40 calls, but the cleaner was inside a duct for many of them and answered 18. Six were real enquiries, and one became a job. The ads brought 22 calls, the cleaner answered 20 because the ads were set to run only from ten to six, and 12 were real enquiries. Three became jobs. Word of mouth brought nine calls, all answered, seven real, four jobs, one of them at a discount to keep a friend.
On cost per answered call the listing looked better (about ₹333 against ₹450 for the ads). On cost per job it was twice as bad (₹6,000 against ₹3,000). The mistake was reading the 40 calls as 40 chances. The fix came in two moves. The listing number went to a relative at the office, to answer during working hours, with one rule: send a WhatsApp message to every missed number. Then most of the spend moved to ads, and the listing stayed as a trial. A quarter on, the ads bring more enquiries than one cleaner can serve, two weeks run with a waiting list, and the cleaner has to decide whether to hire a second crew or cut the spend.
When none of these is the answer
If your diary is already full, adding calls only creates a waiting list, and some buyers who wait will go elsewhere. Spend nothing more until you have capacity.
If you cannot answer the phone during the hours you advertise, no channel will perform. Fix the phone before the budget.
If your whole city holds only a few dozen buyers, such as institutions, a general listing and general ads may reach the wrong crowd. Visit and write to the buyers by name instead.
Splitting the money once you have the numbers
Start from word of mouth, which costs the least. Give ads a sum you can afford to lose during the test. Keep a listing only while its cost per job stays below the ads. Advertising budget planning is the related service when several channels are running, and specialist and other industries has more on trades facing the same choice.
Run the test on your own phone first
Open a sheet today with the four columns above and ask every caller how they found you. After enough calls to see a pattern, you will know where the money goes. If you want help setting it up or reading it, tell us what you need.
