The legal vertical: when $0.058 is fine
Legal buys views at $0.058 and considers it a bargain. Here is the arithmetic that makes that sentence true rather than funny.
The flight
- A personal-injury firm spends $20,000 on skippable in-stream at the legal end of the sourced spread, $0.058 Store Growers, Google Ads Benchmarks, Q1 2026.
- Views = $20,000 / $0.058 = 344,828 thirty-second views Google Ads Help, video ad views, 2026.
- Assumptions, labeled:0.2% of viewers inquire (690 inquiries), 3% of inquiries become signed cases (20 cases, rounded from 20.7). Both rates are the firm's own funnel numbers; no industry conversion benchmark exists in our ledger and none is quoted.
- Acquisition cost: $20,000 / 20 = $1,000 per signed case.
If an average case is worth mid five figures in fees, $1,000 acquisition is not tolerable; it is excellent. The $0.058 CPV that horrified the generalist deck-reviewer is the cheapest line in the firm's P&L.
Why the vertical prices this way
Every competitor runs the same math, so the auction clears where case economics say it should. CPG cannot pay $0.058 for a $4 margin product; legal cannot lose the impression over $0.04. Advertiser density does the rest: the industry spread.
What high-CPV verticals should optimize
- Cost per inquiry and per signed case, never raw CPV.
- Audience precision over reach: paying $0.058 for the wrong county is the actual waste.
- Completion and recall: at these prices, run the CPCV check too.
Legal flight: $20,000 / $0.058 (Store Growers Q1 2026, legal end) = 344,828 views; firm funnel 0.2% inquiry, 3% sign = ~$1,000 per caseThe B2B cousin of this argument: the LinkedIn case. Judge your own vertical: what a good CPV is.