PPC Risk & Opportunities — Hairpin Rebrand
How the name change from “The Hairpin Leg Co.” to “Hairpin” affects paid search strategy, and why the long-term position is stronger than initial analysis suggests.
Context
- Domain change: Already live (hairpin.com)
- Brand name change: Planned, not yet customer-facing. Currently still trading as “The Hairpin Leg Co.” / “The Hairpin Leg Co”
- Product direction: Expanding from furniture components (legs, brackets, hardware) into ready-made furniture and bundles
- Current brand search: Campaign ID 66, “Brand Search - SC”, TARGET_SPEND bidding, £200/day budget. See
../../ppc/google/brand-search-cpc-analysis.mdfor full campaign analysis
Risk: Brand Search Gets More Expensive
The current advantage
“The Hairpin Leg Company” is an unambiguous brand term. Nobody else bids on it, impression share is 93%+ (when the campaign isn’t misconfigured), and CPC is ~£1.50. It’s essentially free to defend.
What changes with “Hairpin”
Bare “hairpin” is a generic English word with multiple meanings — hair accessories, hairpin turns, hairpin legs (product style), and the brand. Bidding on [hairpin] alone would mean competing with the entire hair accessories market, Amazon, eBay, etc.
Test data from existing “Hairpin” ad group (Jan 29 – Feb 9):
| Metric | ”The Hair Pin Leg Company” ad group | ”Hairpin” ad group |
|---|---|---|
| CPC | £1.47 | £4.88 |
| Conversion rate | 6.5% | 0% |
| Conversions | 136.1 | 0 |
| Revenue per click | £6.89 | £0 |
The bare “hairpin” keyword is expensive and doesn’t convert.
Estimated cost increase
Brand search currently costs ~£55/day (£1,650/month) at pre-spike rates. A shorter, more competitive brand name would likely increase brand search CPC 2-3x, adding roughly £1,650–3,300/month. Against £28K/month in ad-attributed revenue, this is meaningful but not prohibitive.
Opportunity: “Hairpin + Product” Is Defensible
The critical insight: you don’t need to bid on bare “hairpin.” Brand search keywords become compound terms:
[hairpin desk][hairpin table][hairpin furniture][hairpin home][hairpin.com]
These compound terms solve two problems at once:
- No hair accessories overlap. Nobody selling hair clips bids on “hairpin desk.” The ambiguity only exists on bare “hairpin.”
- Clear purchase intent. “Hairpin desk” signals someone looking for a specific product, not browsing generically.
The brand search campaign becomes a thin defensive layer bidding on [hairpin furniture], [hairpin desk], [hairpin table], etc. — not an attempt to own a generic English word.
Opportunity: Declining Hairpin Leg Trend Creates a Brand Moat
This is the strongest strategic argument for the rebrand.
The current state
“Hairpin desk” today means “a desk with hairpin-style legs” — a product style search. Multiple retailers bid on it. The term has product-style meaning, not brand meaning.
The trajectory
Hairpin legs as a product trend are declining. As the trend fades:
- Fewer competitors make/sell hairpin-leg furniture
- Fewer retailers bid on “hairpin desk” in Google Ads
- Less organic competition for “hairpin” in the furniture context
- The product-style meaning of “hairpin” in furniture weakens
The play
As the product-style meaning fades, the brand meaning fills the vacuum. “Hairpin Desk” gradually shifts from “desk with hairpin legs” to “desk by Hairpin” — the same way brand names absorb generic meanings when they dominate a category.
This means:
- Competition for “hairpin + product” terms decreases over time, not increases. The opposite of what usually happens with brand search.
- The brand inherits residual SEO value from years of “hairpin leg” content and backlinks across the furniture web.
- The furniture-context meaning of “hairpin” naturally migrates to the brand as the product trend recedes.
The risk window is the next 12–18 months while both meanings coexist. During this period, Shopping ads compete against other hairpin-leg-furniture sellers. But this overlap shrinks organically without any action needed.
Opportunity: Product Direction Makes Brand Search Less Important
Components company vs furniture brand
For a components company (selling legs and brackets), brand search is a large proportion of paid traffic — customers know the product, search the brand name. Brand search might represent 30% of ad-attributed revenue.
For a furniture brand, the keyword battlefield shifts to product and category searches:
- “oak desk” / “industrial desk” / “mid-century dining table”
- “ready made desk” / “handmade furniture”
- “desk under £500” / “small home office desk”
These are served by Shopping campaigns and product listing ads, which work regardless of brand name. The product image, price, and title do the selling — not the brand keyword. Brand search drops to perhaps 5–10% of the total ad strategy.
Cross-channel attribution
The Facebook → Google → conversion chain still works with compound terms. Someone sees a Hairpin desk on Instagram, searches “hairpin desk” on Google, and converts. The brand + product combination is specific enough to capture this traffic without needing bare “hairpin.”
Recommended Google Ads Strategy Post-Rebrand
Brand search campaign (defensive, low budget)
| Setting | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Bidding | Target Impression Share, 95% target |
| Max CPC cap | £3.00 |
| Daily budget | £60–80 |
| Keywords | [hairpin desk], [hairpin table], [hairpin furniture], [hairpin home], [hairpin.com], "hairpin furniture", "hairpin desk" |
| DO NOT bid on | Bare [hairpin] — too generic, hair accessories competition, poor conversion rate |
Immediate fixes (regardless of rebrand timing)
- Switch bidding from TARGET_SPEND to Target Impression Share with CPC cap. TARGET_SPEND is the root cause of the current CPC blowout (£14/click days).
- Reduce budget from £200 to £80/day. Natural brand demand never exceeded £105/day even at peak.
- Remove the existing “Hairpin” ad group (zero conversions, £4.88 CPC) or move to a separate prospecting campaign.
- Set max CPC cap of £3. Prevents algorithmic overbidding regardless of competitive pressure.
During transition period (both brand meanings coexist)
- Monitor “hairpin desk” / “hairpin table” search terms to track whether traffic is brand-intent or product-style-intent
- Track impression share on compound brand terms separately from the legacy brand name terms
- Keep legacy
[hairpin leg company]keywords active — some customers will still use the old name for 1–2 years - Use Shopping campaigns as the primary acquisition channel; brand search is supplementary
Long-term (brand meaning established)
- Phase out legacy brand name keywords as search volume declines
- Expand compound brand terms as new product categories launch (e.g.,
[hairpin shelving],[hairpin storage]) - Brand search should be a low-cost, high-IS defensive campaign — not a growth driver
Data Gaps That Affect This Analysis
| Question | What we’d need | Status |
|---|---|---|
| What do people actually search when looking for us? | Search term reports (search_term_view) | Phase 2 roadmap |
| How are “hairpin desk” searches split between brand and product intent? | Search term data + conversion tracking | Not available until search term sync |
| What’s the organic SERP for “hairpin desk” today? | Manual check or SERP analysis | Can query via DataForSEO |
| How fast is “hairpin legs” declining as a search trend? | Google Trends / keyword volume over time | Can query via DataForSEO |
Research: Hairpin Legs Trend Decline
Qualitative Evidence (Feb 2026)
Industry sources consistently describe hairpin legs as past their peak:
- Accio 2025 trend report: Hairpin legs described as “out” due to “lack of craftsmanship and impracticality.” Chunky wood legs and welded steel bases are the replacement trend — the market is shifting toward substantial, statement-making furniture.
- Sawmill Creek woodworking forum: “Every influencer’s loft has the same slab dining table paired with those ubiquitous hairpin legs.” The style is characterised as a “Pinterest board stuck in 2018.”
- Design59 2024 table leg trends: Hairpin legs not mentioned at all — conspicuously absent from a dedicated table leg trends article. Replaced by minimalist, industrial chic, and mixed material designs.
- Homes & Gardens 2025 furniture trends: The debate has moved to “legs vs no legs” — chunky bases vs visible legs. Hairpin legs aren’t part of the conversation.
The pattern is clear: hairpin legs peaked around 2017-2019 as a DIY/mid-century trend, plateaued through 2020-2022, and are now actively described as dated by the design press.
Quantitative Data — TO DO
Need actual search volume data to quantify the decline rate. Tasks:
- Query DataForSEO for “hairpin legs” UK monthly search volume 2020–2026 (requires DFS MCP server, not available in current session)
- Query DataForSEO for related terms: “hairpin table legs”, “hairpin desk legs”, “hairpin leg desk” — same timeframe
- Compare with replacement terms: “chunky table legs”, “steel table legs”, “wooden table legs” to see whether total market is shrinking or just shifting away from hairpin style
- Google Trends export: “hairpin legs” vs “table legs” UK, 5-year view — shows hairpin as proportion of total interest
This data would convert the qualitative “hairpin legs are declining” claim into a quantified annual decline rate, strengthening the brand moat argument above.
Sources:
- Sawmill Creek — Overdone Trends
- Accio — Table Leg Trends 2025
- Design59 — Table Leg Trends 2024
- Homes & Gardens — Furniture Trends 2025
Summary
| Factor | Risk | Opportunity |
|---|---|---|
| Bare “hairpin” keyword | High — generic, expensive, hair accessories competition | Avoid it entirely; bid on compound terms instead |
| ”Hairpin + product” keywords | Low — specific, no overlap with hair accessories | Defensible, clear intent, reasonable CPC |
| Declining hairpin leg trend | Short-term ambiguity during overlap | Long-term brand moat as product meaning fades |
| Product direction (furniture) | Brand search costs slightly more | Brand search matters less; Shopping ads do heavy lifting |
| Cross-channel attribution | Slightly noisier on bare “hairpin” | Works well on “hairpin desk”, “hairpin furniture” |
Bottom line: The rebrand is sound from a PPC perspective. The short-term cost increase on brand search is modest (~£1,650–3,300/month) and diminishing, while the long-term position — owning “hairpin” in the furniture context as the product-style meaning fades — is strategically strong. The key tactical rule: never bid on bare “hairpin”, always bid on “hairpin + product category.”
Related Documents
../../ppc/google/brand-search-cpc-analysis.md— Current brand search campaign issues and CPC spike analysis./brand-book-v3.md— Brand identity and naming rationale../../shopify-app/docs/ad-platform/working-plan.md— System implementation roadmap (search term sync, config tracking)