A prospect clicks your ad, fills out the form, then asks a single question the moment you call back: "is this actually free with the government grants?" You explain the remaining cost, and the prospect hangs up. This scene repeats itself dozens of times a month in insulation and energy retrofit, and it is expensive: callback time, a demoralized salesperson, a cost per lead that climbs without a single quote going out.
This is not a targeting problem. It is a sector-wide reputation problem that your ad inherits, whether you like it or not.
A reputation damaged by a decade of aggressive door-to-door sales
"One-euro insulation" offers, unsolicited cold calls, fake agencies claiming to act on behalf of the government: French consumer protection authorities publish annual warnings about misleading sales practices tied to energy retrofit subsidies. The public has absorbed a reflex of distrust, and it does not distinguish between the certified installer who has been in business for fifteen years and the call-center subcontractor who disappears after the job.
The concrete consequence for you: part of the audience that sees your ad arrives already defensive, or arrives purely for the subsidy with no real project in mind. Both profiles pollute your pipeline unless something filters them out early.
The cost of not filtering: appointments that go nowhere
A lead who only wants a subsidy simulation costs exactly the same as a lead with a real 15,000 € attic insulation or exterior wall insulation project. The difference plays out entirely downstream, in the sales time spent qualifying, following up, and eventually finding out there is nothing behind the request. It is one of the most common sources of waste we see when digging into a cost per lead that looks reasonable on paper but hides a very low conversion rate.
The good news: the ad itself can do part of the filtering work before the first phone call ever happens.
Reassure with proof, not with claims
Facing a sector suspected of scamming customers, the argument that actually works is not "we are trustworthy," it is whatever can be verified at a glance:
- Your certification displayed with its actual number, not just a logo. A skeptical prospect who can verify the claim themselves drops an objection before it is even raised.
- Real before/after photos from your own job sites, not stock imagery. Insulation membrane being installed, an actual attic before work, an exterior wall mid-finish. The visible technical work reassures more than any slogan.
- Dated, numerous Google reviews, visible directly in the ad feed or right after. A single review from three years ago does not build the same trust as a steady stream.
- Transparency on the remaining cost, from the very first screen. Stating clearly that subsidies cover part of the cost, not all of it, immediately filters out the audience chasing free work, and it does not scare off any real project. If anything, it builds trust.
This logic of verifiable proof over promise is the same one that separates a real project from a subsidy hunter in the neighboring heat pump market, a sector under the exact same regulatory pressure and public distrust.
The form as a filtering tool, not just a contact-collection box
The Meta instant form is where half of the qualification work happens, before your team ever picks up the phone. Three questions are enough to separate a workable project from a simple subsidy inquiry:
- Homeowner or tenant? Energy retrofit subsidies overwhelmingly target owner-occupiers or landlords. A "tenant" answer on this type of work is almost always a lead to set aside.
- Property type and approximate size. A 90 m² single-family house with an unfinished attic has nothing to do with an apartment in a co-owned building, where exterior insulation is a collective decision, not something the individual contact can act on.
- Type of work planned. Attic insulation, exterior wall insulation, or a full retrofit including insulation, heating, and ventilation: the average project value can triple depending on the answer, and your salesperson should know what they are calling about before dialing.
An open question about timeline ("within 3 months," "just researching for later") rounds out the picture without overloading the form. The goal is not to add more fields, it is to ask the two or three questions that actually separate a subsidy hunter from a homeowner with a concrete project in mind.
Simple insulation or full retrofit: two audiences, two promises
An attic insulation job often runs between 2,000 and 6,000 €. A full retrofit with exterior insulation, a new heating system, and ventilation can exceed 30,000 €. These are two different audiences with different motivations: the first wants a quick, targeted improvement, the second is committing to a long-term project, often after an energy audit.
Separating these two offers into distinct campaigns, each with its own creative and its own form, avoids mixing incompatible budgets and expectations. A full-retrofit lead that lands in a pipeline built for simple insulation frustrates everyone, the prospect who expected a complete plan and the salesperson who only has half the information needed to handle it. This same logic of splitting by project value shows up with other building trade companies selling several types of jobs under one brand.
What advertising cannot do on your behalf
A well-built form and transparent creative reduce the volume of unusable leads, but they never eliminate it entirely. There will always be people who tick the right boxes on reflex, or who change their mind between the click and the call. Callback speed and the quality of the first phone conversation remain the final filter, the one that turns a filled-out form into an on-site appointment.
This comes up in most conversations with building trade owners comparing providers: advertising prepares the ground, it does not replace the sales work. If you are evaluating outside help for your campaigns, the same questions apply here as anywhere else, starting with what to check before signing with an agency.
At Solvya, this is the logic we put in place before ever discussing ad budget: upfront filtering, transparency on remaining cost, verifiable proof, and a form that actually screens leads.