u/Lost_Albatross7593

That’s one of the things I have been looking at with Google’s LSA migration, lately.

The migrated LSA campaigns sits inside Google Ads as a specialized Performance Max setup, but they retain several LSA-specific characteristics:

• Pay-per-lead billing
• Keywordless targeting
• Service/job-type targeting
• Search and Maps-focused placement

So treating these campaigns exactly like standard PMax could create problems with reporting and optimization. Realising this, I wanted to post this here to help others too....

Here is the differences and what agencies should actually be looking at.

It Looks Like Performance Max, But It Does Not Behave Like Performance Max

Curious what others think: will agencies treat migrated LSA campaigns as PMax, or continue managing them more like LSA?

By the time the new system appears in your account, you may have very little time to understand what changed. I would rather have the baseline data, account structure, lead history, and reporting documented beforehand.

That way, when Google changes the environment, you can compare what you had before with what you have after.

Check this article to know why LSA migration should start before the actual migration:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lsa-migration-starts-before-google-moves-your-balasubramanian-vrupc

I saw accounts get changed because leads dipped for a couple of days, only for the numbers to move again shortly afterward. The problem isn't always the account.

Sometimes, I think... we are reacting to a short-term fluctuation and calling it as a trend. That's why I think the period after a major LSA change needs to be treated differently.

First thing we need to do is that don't ignore the data, but don't overreact to it either.I hope we need to check this article link to know what to watch during the first two weeks:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-do-during-2-week-stabilization-window-after-lsa-balasubramanian-gh85c

let me know your comments too..

Search behavior is changing faster than many local businesses realize.

People can now ask ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, or Google's AI experiences for recommendations instead of typing a traditional "best [service] near me" query.

That changes what visibility means for local businesses.

I wrote about the shift from traditional search to AI assistants and what it could mean for local service providers:

From Search to AI Assistants: How Local Service Providers Need to Adapt: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/from-search-ai-assistants-how-local-service-providers-harshielha-zyb1c?trackingId=V%2Bi2xhmg4RaO5AdB1qttBw%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3Bq4%2BTyZLrRG6ksAUtWYQBgg%3D%3D

Curious what others are seeing: Are your local clients already getting leads from AI-generated recommendations, or is Google Search still doing almost all the work?

Keywordless targeting makes campaign management simpler, but there's a trade-off.

What happens when you can't control the keywords bringing customers to your LSA?

That's the interesting part of Google's move toward keywordless targeting.

On one hand, it removes a lot of manual work.

On the other, advertisers lose some visibility into how Google decides which searches and customers are relevant.

The bigger question isn't whether keywordless targeting is good or bad.

It's how much control should advertisers give Google before they can no longer explain where their leads are coming from?

I explored that tension here. Just sharing it for knowledge.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/keywordless-targeting-centralised-control-paradox-lsa-harshielha-quduc

I've been following the recent Google Local Services Ads changes, and one thing I don't see many people discussing is TrustedForm.

Most conversations are around verification, advertiser requirements, and account migration. But TrustedForm could end up being one of the most important pieces for businesses that generate leads through forms.

If you're using lead forms for LSAs, it may be worth reviewing how you're capturing and documenting user consent before the July 31 changes are fully in effect. Waiting until something gets flagged is probably the worst time to find out your process has gaps.

I spent some time digging into what has changed and why TrustedForm is becoming more important in the LSA ecosystem. If anyone's interested, here's a breakdown:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-trustedform-matters-more-than-ever-after-july-31-balasubramanian-qq6hc?trackingId=KYf7mGpCDdbs2h7Vq6eRtQ%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3Be3G539vnR1CBYawdFK9e3w%3D%3D

Curious to know how others are handling consent records for lead forms. Are you using TrustedForm, Jornaya, or another solution?

I kept seeing businesses spend more but not necessarily get better results, so I put together a practical breakdown of what actually deserves attention when optimizing Google Local Services.

It's not about chasing hacks—it's about improving the signals Google already looks at, from review quality and response times to profile completeness and lead management.

If you've been running LSAs, I'd love to know:
What's been the biggest factor in improving your rankings or lead quality?

Article: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-should-i-focus-improve-my-google-local-services-balasubramanian-agvcc?trackingId=arDuNSnwylJjN16%2FNljjgg%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3B0ZN0vX7aQlCf1IzUTpToKQ%3D%3D

I wasn't looking for an algorithm change.

I was simply trying to understand why several accounts with stable performance suddenly behaved differently.

The deeper I looked, the more interesting the patterns became.

I'm not saying Google announced a major update.

But I do think something shifted in how visibility is being distributed.

I documented the signals I noticed and why I think they matter.: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/july-6-2026-google-local-services-ads-just-shifted-balasubramanian-jhv5c?trackingId=Syn4vvtYvLC3yQi9MRzlhw%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3B0ZN0vX7aQlCf1IzUTpToKQ%3D%3D

Has anyone else managing Google LSAs seen unexpected changes recently, or is it just me?

I used to think the answer was yes.

Then I audited a multi-location account where one branch was generating leads at almost half the cost of the others.

Nothing looked wrong.

Same ads.
Same keywords.
Same budget strategy.

The only thing that was different was the market.

That experience completely changed how I think about scaling Google Ads for businesses with multiple locations.

I wrote about the approach I'd take today, and I'm curious to know how others manage this.

dropping it here for someone who needs... Also, tell me your thoughts on it..

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-do-multi-location-businesses-structure-google-ads-harshielha-wzeyc?trackingId=WXXkU7jGa0ID%2BbsttNMemA%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3BNKrn1xfgQ32DfXBtEiIj8Q%3D%3D

I'm asking because I fell into that trap.

Whenever performance dipped, I'd change something. Increase the budget. Expand service areas. Tweak settings.

Looking back, I can't help wondering if I was interrupting whatever the system was trying to learn.

Has anyone intentionally left an LSA account alone for a few weeks and compared the results?

I explored that idea here if anyone's interested:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hidden-cost-over-optimizing-google-local-services-ads-harshielha-mnybc

I was digging into how attribution works in Local Services Ads, and something interesting stood out.

Sometimes the person who calls through an LSA isn't actually a "new" customer. They may have already found you through your website, Google Business Profile, or even a referral—and Google still attributes the lead to LSA.

That can completely change how you evaluate ROI.

I broke down why this happens, how Google's attribution works, and the metrics I'd track instead.

Would love to hear if anyone else has seen this.

🔗 https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-google-lsa-ads-often-take-credit-same-customer-balasubramanian-hzaqc

A few weeks ago, I spoke with a contractor who wanted to start advertising on Google Local Services Ads. Before we talked about budgets or leads, he asked me something surprisingly simple:

"Can I run LSA without a website?"

My first instinct was to say, "Yes." But the more we talked, the more I realized the better question wasn't whether you can. It was what happens if you do?

Technically, Google doesn't require a website for many LSA categories. But after looking at how customers actually make hiring decisions, I don't think the answer is as straightforward as a simple yes or no. I broke down my thoughts here:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/can-i-run-google-local-services-ads-without-website-balasubramanian-fnq5c?trackingId=NkhWn80ly2JJw17Lc9ZJPg%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3B%2Bk6aWK4vQ6OBVKdt0JsjZQ%3D%3D

I'm curious...has anyone here successfully run LSA without a website for an extended period?

Honestly, I didn't have a simple answer.

On paper, it feels logical. More budget should mean more visibility. More visibility should mean more leads.

But that's not what happened. After digging into the account, it became clear that the budget wasn't the bottleneck. The system was. It made me rethink how Google's LSA auction actually works and why budget alone rarely tells the whole story.

I wrote down my thoughts here:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/google-lsas-hidden-math-why-most-businesses-budgets-balasubramanian-luafc?trackingId=pDL%2B0Xr7cZ%2Bd47f13E0Tww%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3B%2Bk6aWK4vQ6OBVKdt0JsjZQ%3D%3D

Curious if anyone else has seen something similar.

I'm curious what everyone else's experience has been.

I've been reviewing several Local Services Ads accounts recently, and one pattern keeps appearing. Businesses with consistent review activity seem to maintain visibility better than businesses with larger but stagnant review profiles.

Obviously, proximity still matters. But I'm wondering whether we've collectively underestimated the importance of review velocity.

I summarized what I've been seeing here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-review-velocity-may-matter-more-than-proximity-balasubramanian-ubn5c?trackingId=H%2FPcNfngibNX2OjQOgG1kA%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3B%2Bk6aWK4vQ6OBVKdt0JsjZQ%3D%3D

Would love to hear what others are experiencing.

This is something I've been thinking about lately.

Everyone tracks:

• Cost per lead
• Lead volume
• Weekly spend

But how many people track the leads that never become conversations?

A missed call. A delayed callback. A customer who gives up after waiting. Those don't always show up as obvious failures, but they still cost the business money.

I explored the idea in this article because I think a lot of LSA performance problems happen outside Google's dashboard. Would love to know what others have seen.

https://open.substack.com/pub/harshielha/p/how-many-of-your-lsa-leads-are-invisible?r=88hwsv&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

I couldn't find a clear answer.

The more I researched, the more I realized that while Google doesn't publicly say it uses historical booking behavior as a ranking signal, it's an interesting lens for thinking about how modern machine learning systems evaluate performance.

That question eventually became an article—not because I found a definitive answer, but because it changed the questions I was asking about Local Services Ads.

If you've ever wondered the same thing, here's what I found:

https://harshielha.substack.com/p/does-google-lsa-use-historical-booking

Most discussions focus on rankings, reviews, or budgets.

Very few talk about lead visibility.

If your agency or partner only gives summary reports, how do you know:

• Which leads were disputed?
• Which calls were missed?
• Which leads actually became booked jobs?

Curious how others are handling this.

I wrote up my findings here:
https://medium.com/@pbharshielha/most-google-lsa-audits-miss-the-biggest-problem-lead-visibility-c129f0683e90

Would love to hear how much raw lead access you have.

A lot of businesses focus on generating more leads.

Very few focus on verifying lead quality before those leads reach sales teams.

The problem is that poor-quality leads create hidden costs:

• Wasted sales time
• Lower close rates
• Inflated acquisition costs
• Bad performance data

I've been researching how smarter businesses validate leads before they become expensive problems and found that the best systems focus on qualification, intent signals, and verification long before revenue is affected.

I broke down the process here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-smart-businesses-verify-lead-quality-before-hurts-harshielha-ugu7c?trackingId=gygfkuCiXH6a9wcyi5pNpQ%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_recent_activity_content_view%3By678E7AWTxuQfyqIkmFOnA%3D%3D

How is everyone here measuring lead quality today?