Technical Marketer in Nepal: Ads, CRM and Web Under One Roof

On the call, across whichever parts of the stack matter to you — ad account screenshots, CRM pipeline structure, tagging setup, or code. Nothing client-identifying is published on this site, and no client's results appear on any page here. The public proof is the checkable kind: Google Partner status verifiable in Google's own directory, three live SaaS products you can visit, and this site's own technical implementation.

Someone who runs the campaigns and also builds the infrastructure underneath them — the tagging server, the Conversions API integration, the CRM webhooks, and the landing pages. The practical test is whether the person setting your bid strategy can also write the script that checks your landing pages for broken URLs. If those are two different people, the handoff between them is where measurement usually fails.

Because the failures cluster at the boundaries. A redesign changes a thank-you page URL and kills a conversion action. A campaign optimizes toward form fills because nobody stored the click ID on the lead record. A CRM integration runs as a nightly export, so the ad platform never learns which lead closed. One owner across all three means those dependencies are designed together rather than discovered in an audit.

When the volume genuinely needs them. A business running several million dollars a year in media, a large in-house content operation, or a complex enterprise platform migration needs dedicated teams, and one person becomes the bottleneck. The single-owner model fits businesses where the ads, the CRM, and the website are all small enough for one person to hold in their head and interdependent enough that seams cost real money.

Yes — most of the ad spend behind this page was managed outside Nepal, across seven or more countries including India, Australia, and the United States. The base is Pokhara and the work is remote. For Nepali businesses, what carries over is the operating method rather than local cost benchmarks, which is a distinction worth being explicit about before an engagement starts.

Auditing what is currently measured, before anything is changed. Conversion actions are traced to the events that fire them, the rendering and speed of key landing pages is checked, and the path from form submission to CRM record to ad platform is followed end to end. Strategy changes made before that audit are decisions built on inputs nobody has verified.

Yes, though it is worth saying that a site built without the tracking and CRM work attached gives up most of the advantage described on this page. If web development alone is the requirement, that is a legitimate engagement — but the argument here is about removing seams, and a site delivered to another team to instrument reintroduces one of them.

Neither cleanly, which is exactly the categorization problem this page exists to address. The work is paid acquisition, tracking infrastructure, CRM architecture, and web engineering held by one person operating as Arcetis. Directories tend to file that under software engineering, which is why marketing-only searches often miss it — the capability is the same either way.