Intent versus discovery — the whole difference
Every ad platform falls into one of two buckets. Google is intent. Meta is discovery. When someone types “guided motorcycle tour Patagonia” into Google, they've already decided they want the thing — your ad puts you in front of a person with their wallet halfway out. That's intent, and it's valuable because the desire already exists; you're catching it, not creating it. Meta — Facebook and Instagram — is the opposite: nobody opens Instagram looking to buy a trip, but a stunning shot of a rider carving through a mountain pass plants a seed in someone who wasn't thinking about it. That's discovery. Both work — they just work differently, and confusing the two is how ad budgets get wasted.
When Google wins
Google earns its keep when people already know they want what you sell. If travelers are searching “adventure motorcycle tour Peru” or “guided trek Nepal,” you'd be crazy not to be there — these are the hottest leads on the internet. The catch is search volume caps you: only so many people search for your specific trip each month, so Google captures demand but can't manufacture more. At MotoDreamer my forms run around $2.50 a lead, and intent-driven traffic is a big reason that number stays low — warm searchers convert better than cold scrollers, so you pay less per actual inquiry. If someone's ready to buy, meeting them at the search box is the cheapest sale you'll make.
When Meta wins
Meta shines when you need to fill the top of the funnel — when there aren't enough people searching, or your trip is so unique travelers don't know to look for it. A jaw-dropping photo or short clip can stop a thumb and create a customer who had no idea your trip existed that morning. Meta's other strength is the long game: adventure trips have long consideration windows, and Meta is superb at staying in front of someone across that stretch and retargeting people who visited but didn't inquire. Leads often cost more up front than Google's, because you're creating demand rather than harvesting it, but you're reaching people Google never could.
How I actually decide
In practice it's rarely either-or — it's sequence and proportion. I usually start with Google to capture the demand that already exists, because it's the fastest path to leads and it tells me what people actually want. Then I layer Meta on top to fill the funnel, build the brand, and retarget the people Google sent who weren't ready yet. Which one leads depends on your budget, your trips, and how much search demand exists in your market — that's the judgment fifteen years in digital marketing and running paid ads since 2011 actually buys you. But whichever you run, both point traffic at your website, and if that site is slow or your follow-up is broken, you're paying to fill a leaky bucket. Get the foundation right first.
Get a free demo
Before you spend another dollar on ads, make sure the site they point to actually converts. I'll build you a free homepage demo so you can see the difference.