I’ve been working with tree service companies for over a decade, mostly on the paid ads side, and Tree Services Marketing — Google Ads has a way of exposing weaknesses faster in this industry than almost any other home service. Chainsaws, cranes, and insurance premiums don’t leave much room for marketing mistakes. I learned that early—usually after a phone call that started with “We’re getting leads, but none of them are any good.”
The first and most expensive mistake I see is assuming more clicks will eventually fix a high cost per lead. Early in my career, I inherited an account that was spending steadily and generating traffic, but CPL kept climbing every week. The owner thought the answer was to raise the budget so the algorithm could “figure it out.” What actually happened was predictable: more unqualified searches, more tire-kickers, and even more wasted spend. In tree services, volume doesn’t smooth out quality. It amplifies whatever problem already exists.
The fix almost always starts with tightening intent. Tree companies don’t sell curiosity—they sell solutions to urgent, physical problems. When I’ve cut campaigns back to fewer, clearer search terms, CPL usually drops within days. It feels uncomfortable at first because call volume dips, but the calls that remain are the ones crews actually want to run.
Another mistake I’ve personally made is letting campaigns run unchanged through seasonal shifts. Tree work doesn’t behave like HVAC or plumbing. Storm damage spikes fast and disappears just as quickly. I remember a spring where emergency keywords were printing money after high winds. We left bids aggressive into early summer out of habit, and CPL quietly doubled. The demand wasn’t there anymore, but the ads kept acting like it was. Fixing CPL meant acknowledging reality: adjusting bids down, pausing emergency-focused terms, and letting routine trimming and removals carry the account until the next weather event.
Service area creep is another silent killer. Tree companies love flexibility, and I get it—one big removal can justify a long drive. But Google Ads doesn’t understand job profitability, only geography. I once reviewed a campaign that looked healthy until we overlaid actual job locations. Nearly half the leads were coming from areas the crews hated servicing. Travel time, fuel, and lost productivity were inflating the true cost per lead well beyond what the dashboard showed. Pulling those areas back didn’t just reduce CPL—it reduced burnout.
Phone handling is a mistake marketers don’t like to talk about, but I’ve sat next to enough owners to know it matters. I’ve heard leads wasted because someone sounded rushed, skeptical, or annoyed. In one case, the same homeowner called twice in a week after clicking different ads. The first call was brushed off. The second turned into a large removal because the owner slowed down and explained the risk and equipment involved. No ad change fixed CPL there—the fix was how the call was handled.
I’m also wary of over-automating bids in tree service accounts. Pricing varies too much job to job. Automation tends to chase cheap clicks, and cheap clicks often mean small trimming jobs, rental property price shoppers, or DIY-minded homeowners. I’ve lowered CPL more than once by deliberately excluding terms that looked “high volume” but never produced real work. Less noise almost always improves the numbers.
The most consistent fix for high CPL isn’t a trick or setting—it’s alignment. The ads, the service area, the phone conversations, and the type of work the company actually wants all have to point in the same direction. When they don’t, Google Ads becomes an expensive reminder of every operational mismatch in the business. When they do, CPL usually takes care of itself.