Case file 03 · Landscaping company · Mountain West
A service-area business that was only winning near the yard.
Coverage on the core service term sat at 2.4 percent of the grid. Twenty-eight days later it was 29.6 percent, and direction requests were running 124.7 percent above the same month a year earlier.
2.4% → 29.6%
Top-three map coverage
Core service term, 28 days
+124.7%
Direction requests
182 in the month, year over year
90 → 162
Website clicks
Up 80%, six months
2 of 2
Keywords improved
Both core terms up
What that extra demand is worth
$9,000 a month
About $9,000 in new annual contract value, every month.
101 direction requests x 5% x $1,800 annual contract
Estimated, not invoiced. The leads are measured, the close rate and the job value are assumptions we hold under the industry benchmark. See the whole calculation
"landscaping services near [city]"
Top-three coverage 2.4% to 29.6%
![Google Maps ranking grid before for "landscaping services near [city]", Landscaping company](/grids/grid-25-a.webp)
![Google Maps ranking grid after for "landscaping services near [city]", Landscaping company](/grids/grid-25-b.webp)
The situation
What the baseline actually showed.
A landscaping company is a service area business, which means its crews drive to the work and the profile has to rank across the territory those trucks cover. This one ranked near the yard and nowhere else, which is the default state for a service area profile nobody has configured properly.
Two point four percent top-three coverage on the core service term is the number that matters here. It means that of all the points across the service area where somebody could search for this service, the company was a top-three answer at almost none of them. The trucks could reach the work. Google was not offering the company for it.
The second term was healthier at 18.9 percent, which confirmed the profile was not broken, just badly bounded. That is a fixable problem and a fast one.
Goals and measurement window
What we set out to move.
Two core service terms were tracked, both describing the work the company wants more of rather than the work it already gets from referral.
- Lift coverage on the core service term by an order of magnitude, not by a few points
- Extend coverage outward from the yard across the territory the crews actually serve
- Convert coverage into direction requests, the clearest signal of intent for a business people drive to or book on site
- Hold the gain across two re-scans rather than one
Measurement window: March to July 2025
What we implemented
The work, in the order it ran.
-
Grid scan and baseline
May 27, 2025
Grid locked across both service terms. The baseline showed the classic service area pattern: a tight cluster of coverage around the yard, red across the rest of the territory.
-
Competitor teardown
Same week
The pack holders on the core term were benchmarked for category, service depth and review recency, which set the target for the rebuild.
-
Profile rebuild
Weeks one to three
Categories reset against the benchmark. Service list expanded to name every service the crews sell. Service area redrawn to where the trucks genuinely go, because an optimistic radius dilutes the same signal across ground the company cannot service. Name, address and phone made consistent across citations.
-
Review system
Built in, then ongoing
Review requests built into job close-out so the rate keeps running, with prompts that encourage the reviewer to name the service and the area worked.
-
Re-scan, report, adjust
June 24 and July 8, 2025
Same grid, twice. Coverage on the core term moved from 2.4 percent to 29.6 percent in twenty-eight days. The second term reached 37.9 percent by July 8.
This is the same sequence every account runs. See the full process
Before and after
Every keyword we tracked, including the ones that barely moved.
Top-three coverage is the share of grid points where the profile held position one, two or three. Same grid, same points, both dates.
| Keyword | Before | After | Scan dates | Days |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| landscaping services near [city] | 2.4% | 29.6% | May 27, 2025 → Jun 24, 2025 | 28 |
| landscaping [city] | 18.9% | 37.9% | May 27, 2025 → Jul 8, 2025 | 42 |
"landscaping services near [city]"
2.4% → 29.6%
"landscaping [city]"
18.9% → 37.9%
![Before grid, "landscaping [city]", Landscaping company](/grids/grid-33-a.webp)
![After grid, "landscaping [city]", Landscaping company](/grids/grid-33-b.webp)
What the coverage produced
Rankings are the input. This is the output.
Read from the client's own Google Business Profile performance panel. Each row compares a period against the period immediately before it, or against the same period a year earlier where the row says so.
| Metric | Before | After | Change | Window |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direction requests | Prior year | 182 | +124.7% | March to April 2025 against March to April 2024 |
| Website clicks | 90 | 162 | +80% | Last 6 months against the prior 6 |
Source: GBP performance panel, year over year · GBP performance panel
What that demand is worth
The calculation, with every assumption showing.
One number here is measured and two are assumptions. They are laid out separately so you can throw ours away and put your own close rate and your own average job in their place. Your numbers are the only ones that matter.
- +101 direction requests a month Measured
- Measured, but weaker evidence than a call. This client has no call tracking in the panel, so the model runs off direction requests: 182 in the month against about 81 in the same month a year earlier.
- 5% close rate Assumption
- Assumption, and a deliberately harsh one. A direction request is not a phone call, so it is modeled at roughly a seventh of the phone lead benchmark rather than at it.
- $1,800 average job Assumption
- Assumption, held at the low end. Routine residential maintenance runs $100 to $300 a month across most US markets, which is $1,200 to $3,600 a year per customer.
101 direction requests x 5% x $1,800 annual contract
$9,000 a month
About $9,000 in new annual contract value, every month.
Read this before you quote the number
This is a model, not an invoice. The lead figure is measured off the client’s own Google Business Profile. The close rate and the job value are assumptions, both held at or below the published benchmark, and both printed above so you can replace them with your own. We did not follow these leads to signed jobs or paid invoices, so this is what the extra demand is worth at those assumptions, not revenue we have verified.
Benchmarks used: Invoca home services lead conversion benchmarks 2026, phone leads convert at 46% · Breasy, landscaping services cost, 2026 guide
How this was measured
So you can check it rather than trust it.
Rankings are measured with a geo-grid, not a single rank check. The scanner queries Google Maps from a fixed lattice of points spread across the client’s service area and records the business position at every point. Top-three coverage is the share of those points where the profile holds position one, two or three.
The same grid, the same points and the same keywords are used for the baseline and for every re-scan. Moving the grid between scans would make the comparison meaningless, so the grid is locked at baseline and never changed.
Call, website click and direction request figures are read from the client’s own Google Business Profile performance panel, comparing a period against the immediately preceding period of equal length, or against the same period a year earlier where stated.
Every scan carries its date. Both dates are printed next to every row in the keyword table below, so any claim on this page can be checked against the pair of images it came from.
What these numbers do not say
- These results were selected. They are not typical of every engagement and they are not a forecast of yours.
- Google Business Profile performance figures measure demand reaching the profile. They are not signed jobs and they are not revenue. This page does not claim either.
- Nobody can guarantee a Google ranking. Positions move with competitors, categories, proximity and Google’s own updates.
- Landscaping is seasonal. The year over year comparison is the honest one to read here, because it holds the season constant. The six month click comparison does not, and part of that gain is spring demand rather than ranking.
Client name, city and profile ID are withheld on every case study we publish. Contractors get called by vendors the moment they show up in a results page, so we do not put them there.