The Cremarc Blog - B2B Account Automation

Every year someone publishes a chart showing LinkedIn ads getting more expensive. And every year, B2B Tech teams quietly start wondering: “Are we overpaying for this channel?” Here’s the uncomfortable truth: LinkedIn is getting more expensive - if you’re measuring the wrong thing. But if you measure what actually matters in B2B Tech - accounts, buying groups, and influenced deal progression - LinkedIn‑led ABM is becoming meaningfully more efficient, not less. New data and findings from Dreamdata finally puts numbers behind something many experienced marketers have felt intuitively for years. B2B Tech buying has outgrown lead economics The latest benchmarks confirm what most B2B Tech teams already feel operationally: 81% of the buyer journey happens before sales is involved (up from 70% just a year ago) Average time from first touch to revenue is now 272 days Deals involve ~10 stakeholders, across ~88 touchpoints, over 4+ channels This isn’t just ‘longer sales cycles’. It’s a fundamental shift in how B2B tech buying decisions are made. B2B Tech buyers: Research independently Align internally before raising a hand Shortlist vendors before talking to sales Which exposes the core flaw in how many teams still judge paid performance. Why LinkedIn looks expensive (and why that’s misleading) If you look at CPC, CPL and Cost per contact, LinkedIn still looks pricey. Clicks cost more than Meta. Leads cost more than search. CPMs keep rising. That’s all true. But… none of those metrics reflect how B2B Tech deals are won. You don’t win because: One person downloaded something One job title filled in a form One click converted quickly You win because: The right company remembers you Multiple stakeholders in the buying committee trust your point of view Sales enters the conversation late, but with momentum That means your real economic unit isn’t the lead. It’s the account. The stat that changes everything: Cost per Company is falling This is the headline most people miss. Year‑over‑year, cost per company influenced on LinkedIn fell by ~54%, dropping from roughly £134 to £61. That’s huge! And at the same time; Cost per Contact increased, CPCs increased slightly, and CPMs held or rose. This feels contradictory until you look at it properly. What’s happening is this… LinkedIn is reaching more people within the same target accounts More roles, more seniority bands, more buying‑group coverage Those touches are now being correctly grouped at the company level So although each individual interaction costs more, the total cost to influence an account has collapsed. That’s ABM economics improving in real time. Why LinkedIn is structurally suited to B2B Account-Based Marketing This isn’t a short‑term platform quirk. It’s structural. LinkedIn is organised around companies Firmographics, seniority, role, function - LinkedIn naturally clusters spend around accounts, even if most reporting doesn’t. Buying groups are getting larger, not smaller As stakeholder counts rise, channels that hit multiple people inside the same org become more efficient in B2B - not less. Attribution has finally caught up Improved company resolution and new company‑level signals (including organic Company Page views) mean influence that always existed is now being measured correctly instead of misattributed or ignored. LinkedIn didn’t suddenly get cheaper. We just stopped undercounting what it actually does. Engagement is now a commercial signal and not a vanity metric Another crucial finding: Ad engagement predicts revenue almost as strongly as conversions. Time from: First LinkedIn ad engagement to revenue is ~212 days First LinkedIn ad conversion to revenue is ~214 days In long B2B Tech cycles, someone engaging with thought leadership, video or POV content can be just as commercially meaningful as someone filling out a form. Because those content types build trust – they aren’t looking for a quick win but rather providing value to the consumer. This finally validates what ABM agencies (like us) and teams have been doing for years; Tracking interaction quality Watching account‑level heat Using engagement as a leading readiness signal LinkedIn‑led ABM works because it surfaces early intent, not just late-stage demand. LinkedIn is no longer ToFu only One of the more surprising shifts is that LinkedIn’s influence increases after MQL, rather than dropping off. Share of sessions rises from ~24% at MQL, ~30% at SQL, and ~28% at closed‑won. In other words, LinkedIn isn’t just creating salience - it’s supporting deals during evaluation. That’s critical for B2B Tech vendors selling: High‑risk platforms Regulated solutions Enterprise infrastructure Complex integrations Expensive transformations or products Brand presence during sales cycles is now measurable - and measurable brand activity tends to win because its allowed to continue running for enough time to be effective. What this means practically for B2B ABM teams Here’s how smart B2B Tech teams should be responding now. 1. Reframe Performance around accounts Stop asking “What did this lead cost?” and start asking “How much are we investing to influence the right accounts at the right depth?” If you don’t have account‑level reporting, you are flying blind. Ideally, use a tool like HubSpot and sync the data between LinkedIn – this is how we’ve found account-level ABM measurement most effective. 2. Design LinkedIn for buying‑group coverage, not conversion flow Run parallel creative against the same account lists with POV content (predictions and thought leadership are so effective!) and diagnostic insights to help buyers along on their long, self-serve buying journey. Assume any ad could be the first one they see so make everything valuable. 3. Treat Engagement as a signal, not a failure In long‑cycle ABM, a save, video view, or Company Page visit is progress. Not all value wears a form fill. Sales teams benefit when marketing warms accounts before outreach begins. 4. Budget for memory, not just motion Zero‑click search, AI summaries, and longer buying cycles mean being remembered matters more than being clicked. LinkedIn excels at building familiarity, reinforcing positioning, and keeping your brand mentally available across months (and sometimes years). That’s why the account economics on the platform are improving. If you judge LinkedIn through a B2C or lead‑gen lens, it will always look expensive. But if you judge it how B2B Tech actually operates: Companies over contacts Buying groups over buyers Influence over immediacy Then the data is unambiguous. “LinkedIn‑led ABM is becoming more effective, more measurable, and cheaper at the level that actually drives revenue in B2B Tech.” - Gabe, Head of Strategy The teams who understand this now will stop arguing about CPL - and start winning deals faster, with less friction, and fewer bad lead conversations.

ABM

LinkedIn ABM is actually getting cheaper: New B2B Tech marketing data (2026)

Account-Based Marketing Has Entered Its AI Era: What Comes Next

Why a Buyer‑Led B2B GTM is more effective than traditional B2B Demand Generation

Have Buying Groups Dethroned MQLs? Decoding the Modern B2B Marketing Shift

Is Account Based Marketing (ABM) The Way To Cut Through The Noise

Marketing & Marketers Need to Be More Agile