The $50k two-market plan
Structure: one anchor market and one test market, bulletins for reach in both, place-based pDOOH layered where your buyers actually stand. Not split evenly: even splits are a default, not a decision. Weight the anchor market 60/40 and defend the weighting with a sentence, or your reviewer will invent one for you.
| Line | Spend | Output range (arithmetic shown) |
|---|---|---|
| Digital bulletins, both markets, 4 weeks | $30,000 | At $5-$18 CPM: 30,000 / 18 x 1,000 = 1,666,667 to 30,000 / 5 x 1,000 = 6,000,000 impressions. Claim 1.67M-6M. |
| Place-based pDOOH (gyms, groceries, offices) | $20,000 | At the claimed $2-$15 CPM: 20,000 / 15 x 1,000 = 1,333,333 to 20,000 / 2 x 1,000 = 10,000,000 venue impressions, BEFORE unpublished DSP/SSP/data fees. |
Bulletin band: AdQuick 2026. Place-based range: StackAdapt's claim, labeled as such.
The two honesty flags this plan carries
- The place-based line uses a vendor's advertised range StackAdapt 2026, cross-checked against Adomni's published ~$12 average eCPM Adomni 2026; the deck labels it "vendor-claimed band", not "market rate".
- The pDOOH working-media line reads "fees: quoted in writing, pending" until your DSP answers; the two-line request is in direct vs programmatic. Venue impressions are exposure estimates Geopath Ongoing, footnoted as such.
The deck table this produces
Four rows: spend by format and market, cited CPM band applied, impression range, measurement owner. Bulletins carry the published band AdQuick 2026; place-based carries the labeled claim; totals stay as ranges (3M-16M gross impressions, mixed definitions footnoted). Assembly instructions: the deck page.
Smaller: $25k test. Bigger: $100k launch. Venue detail: place-based. Rerun it in the planner.