u/Sound-Evening

We have a partner running Meta motivated seller campaigns for us; we pay them a cut of closed deals, not per lead. However they told us their CPL is around $20 and we close about 1 in 52 into contracts.

My guess is the $20 CPL means they're casting a wide net (i.e., broad targeting, low intent, people who clicked but weren't that serious). But I don't run the campaigns and the partner keeps their cards close to their vest so I'm mostly just guessing.

Question for anyone who actually manages these campaigns: if we pushed toward tighter audience targeting (e.g., $100-150 CPL, just throwing a number out there), would we actually see better leads and a much higher closer rate? Or does tighter targeting on Meta just reduce volume without really improving who fills out the form? Curious to hear your experiences, thanks!

We have a partner running Meta motivated seller campaigns for us; we pay them a cut of closed deals, not per lead. However they told us their CPL is around $20 and we close about 1 in 52 into contracts.

My guess is the $20 CPL means they're casting a wide net (i.e., broad targeting, low intent, people who clicked but weren't that serious). But I don't run the campaigns and the partner keeps their cards close to their vest so I'm mostly just guessing.

Question for anyone who actually manages these campaigns: if we pushed toward tighter audience targeting (e.g., $100-150 CPL, just throwing a number out there), would we actually see better leads and a much higher closer rate? Or does tighter targeting on Meta just reduce volume without really improving who fills out the form? Curious to hear your experiences, thanks!

Seems like there is no way to easily switch between workspaces on the Quo app/online or on the phone. The idea is to stay available on both and prevent having to login and out every time. Anyone have a workaround for this?

Might be impossible to know for certain, but curious what people here think, especially those who've actually dug into the specs or have been using the device for a while.

I've seen a handful of posts flagging inconsistent sleep tracking, which matters a lot to me because my main reason for buying is the autopilot feature. Though I acknowledge it could just be a vocal few; to that end I'd encourage folks who are seeing good alignment between their Whoop or Apple Watch (who also seems to perform well, see chart) and their Orion to comment here as well.The whole value prop of autopilot--adjusting temp throughout the night to extend and improve sleep--only works if the underlying sleep data is solid. Garbage in, garbage out.

So the real question is: is this a sensor/hardware problem, or is it a software/firmware problem? Because those have very different implications as a buyer. If it's hardware (i.e., sensor density, sensor placement, etc.) then no amount of firmware updates will fix it and you'll probably need to upgrade to gen 2 whenever that's released. If it's software, there's a reasonable path to improvement over the next 6-18 months without having to rebuy.

Worth noting: The Quantified Scientist, one of the more rigorous independent sleep tracker reviewer out there, benchmarks devices against a Hypnodyne ZMax EEG headband as ground truth, and Orion hasn't been assessed yet. Which also raises a fair question: how is Orion validating their own sleep tracking accuracy internally? How do we think it'll end up holding up against Eight Sleep who seems to outperform as far as wearables go (see chart).

I'd appreciate Orion's folks chiming in here. But has anyone done enough digging to have a real opinion?

Screenshot from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHj9R9u5a8Y