Compensation Proposal · Appendix A
Ad spend doesn't sit alone on the cost side — my pay is part of the marketing engine too. This page recomputes return on ad spend to include compensation cost, and compares the three models against one another on net ROAS.
Gross ROAS treats the ad account as the only cost. Net ROAS treats the compensation model as part of the same investment.
When pay doesn't flex with outcomes, it drags net ROAS down in bad months. When pay is structured to follow installs, the ratio holds up better in aggregate.
Flat $2,700 per month. Pay sits on top of ad spend as a fixed cost; revenue — and therefore net ROAS — swings wildly underneath it.
Pay tracks lead and job volume. Slight YTD improvement over flat, but March — 46 leads, 1 install — pays the most and drags net ROAS down most.
Pay concentrates in install months. February costs more, but the return justifies it; January and April cost less, preserving ROAS when revenue is thin.
Net ROAS per month, one line per pay model. The dashed reference is gross ROAS — ad spend only, before any compensation is factored in.
| Month | Ad Spend | Revenue | Flat Pay | Revision 01 | Revision 02 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pay | Net ROAS | Pay | Net ROAS | Pay | Net ROAS | |||
| January | $2,210.76 | $49.00 | $2,700 | 0.010× | $1,580.00 | 0.013× | $1,225.00 | 0.014× |
| February | $4,682.26 | $36,113.30 | $2,700 | 4.892× | $2,900.48 | 4.763× | $3,415.48 | 4.459× |
| March | $7,621.48 | $12,749.05 | $2,700 | 1.235× | $3,330.43 | 1.164× | $1,925.43 | 1.335× |
| April (through 22nd) | $4,098.87 | $1,433.09 | $2,700 | 0.211× | $2,010.00 | 0.235× | $1,350.00 | 0.263× |
| YTD Total | $18,613.37 | $50,344.44 | $10,800 | 1.712× | $9,820.91 | 1.771× | $7,915.91 | 1.898× |
Each of the three models leaves the revenue untouched — the business closed $50,344 in Facebook-attributed work regardless of what I was paid. The difference is cost: Revision 02 achieves the same outcome with $2,884 less total spend on marketing + pay, which pushes net ROAS from 1.71× under flat pay to 1.90×.
Month by month, Revision 02 wins the return argument in three of four months. The only month flat pay looks better on paper is February — and only because flat pays less in a month when I delivered most. That's the exact trade the install-weighted structure is designed to make.
Methodology. Net ROAS is computed as FB-attributed revenue divided by the sum of Meta ad spend and the compensation model in effect. Monthly flat uses the stated $2,700 rate; Revisions 01 and 02 use the computed totals from their respective proposals. Revenue is raw jobs.total_amount on jobs completed in-month, attributed to customers whose resolved channel is Facebook (lead_source + tag resolution, including manual HCP tagging). Ad spend comes from Meta Graph API v22.0, monthly increment. Figures do not yet apply the portal's standard incentive or warranty adjustments. Actual YTD payroll came in at $9,000 rather than the theoretical $10,800, which would put the flat net ROAS at 1.82× — still below Revision 02's 1.90×. April is partial.