Killing Vanity Wins: Why “More Sales” isn’t More Profit
Killing Vanity Wins: Why “More Sales” isn’t More Profit
Killing Vanity Wins: Why “More Sales” isn’t More Profit
A collection-wide BOGO offer looked like a win at first glance, but deeper analysis revealed shrinking margins and attribution gaps. I restructured the test to protect profitability.
Services:
AB Testing | CRO
AB Testing | CRO
Client:
Luxmery
Luxmery
Year:
2025
2025
Problem:
We tested Luxmery’s hero product Sculpting Bodysuit BOGO against a broader BOGO Collection of multiple shapewear products. While the collection drove strong engagement and orders, I flagged that top-line numbers masked serious profitability risks:
Products in the collection had variable costs.
Some SKUs carried thinner margins, priced too close to baseline.
Early reports showed Shopify vs AB Convert revenue discrepancies.
Approach:
Data Sources → Combined AB Convert test results, Shopify exports, and product-level cost/shipping data.
Financial CRO Framework → Built a Break-Even ROAS calculator and measured Profit per Visitor (PPV) instead of only conversion rate.
Discrepancy Check → Identified a 35% mismatch between Shopify and AB Convert revenue attribution.
SKU-Level Analysis → Broke down contribution margin by product in the collection, highlighting how higher-cost items diluted overall profit.
This is where I shine: I don’t get seduced by “big revenue spikes.” I run financial CRO, reconciling data sources, calculating profit per visitor, and protecting working capital. It’s how I make sure growth translates into actual cash in the bank, not vanity wins.
Results:
While the Collection generated more excitement, it reduced profitability by 30%.
Identified hidden operational complexity → analyzing blended SKUs took longer, raising the risk of margin erosion.
Recommended reverting to SCB BOGO as default, while testing free gifts (B1G2) or installment tweaks as more profitable upsell levers.
Problem:
We tested Luxmery’s hero product Sculpting Bodysuit BOGO against a broader BOGO Collection of multiple shapewear products. While the collection drove strong engagement and orders, I flagged that top-line numbers masked serious profitability risks:
Products in the collection had variable costs.
Some SKUs carried thinner margins, priced too close to baseline.
Early reports showed Shopify vs AB Convert revenue discrepancies.
Approach:
Data Sources → Combined AB Convert test results, Shopify exports, and product-level cost/shipping data.
Financial CRO Framework → Built a Break-Even ROAS calculator and measured Profit per Visitor (PPV) instead of only conversion rate.
Discrepancy Check → Identified a 35% mismatch between Shopify and AB Convert revenue attribution.
SKU-Level Analysis → Broke down contribution margin by product in the collection, highlighting how higher-cost items diluted overall profit.
This is where I shine: I don’t get seduced by “big revenue spikes.” I run financial CRO, reconciling data sources, calculating profit per visitor, and protecting working capital. It’s how I make sure growth translates into actual cash in the bank, not vanity wins.
Results:
While the Collection generated more excitement, it reduced profitability by 30%.
Identified hidden operational complexity → analyzing blended SKUs took longer, raising the risk of margin erosion.
Recommended reverting to SCB BOGO as default, while testing free gifts (B1G2) or installment tweaks as more profitable upsell levers.
