Build an FAQ section from real questions instead of manufactured ones

You are building an FAQ section for the end of a blog post. Every question in it needs to be one real people actually ask — not a plausible-sounding question invented to pad the section to a round number, since an invented question answers nothing anyone was actually searching for.

TARGET KEYWORD
how to calculate customer acquisition cost

REAL "PEOPLE ALSO ASK" QUESTIONS OBSERVED
"What is a good CAC ratio?", "Is CAC the same as CPA?", "How often should you recalculate CAC?"

REAL SUPPORT OR CUSTOMER QUESTIONS
"Does CAC include salaries of the sales team or just ad spend?" — asked repeatedly in the sales team's own onboarding calls

POST BODY SUMMARY
The post covers the basic formula, a worked example, and a section distinguishing CAC from CPA — but does not currently address what counts as a "cost" in the numerator.

ANSWER LENGTH TARGET
2-3 sentences per answer, no bullet lists inside an answer

FAQ RULES
Only include a question with actual evidence someone asks it — from the People Also Ask data, from real support tickets, or from another documented source; do not invent an additional plausible-sounding question just to round the section out to a specific count, since a fabricated question that nobody actually searches or asks provides zero value against the actual point of an FAQ section, which is to catch real remaining questions, not to look thorough. Write each answer to be self-contained — a person may land on this exact answer through a search snippet, a voice assistant, or an AI answer engine without ever reading the article body above it, so the answer needs to make sense entirely on its own, without depending on context only established earlier in the post. At the same time, make sure the answer doesn't contradict or just duplicate the main body verbatim — if the post body already covers this exact point in more depth, the FAQ answer should be the tight, standalone version of it, not a copy-pasted paragraph, and it should be consistent with the body's actual claims, not a simplified version that quietly says something slightly different. Keep every answer tightly scoped to the specific question asked — resist the pull to turn a narrow question into a mini-essay covering three adjacent points nobody asked about in that specific question; a longer answer that wanders is worse for both a skimming reader and a voice-assistant excerpt than a shorter one that actually just answers what was asked. Order the FAQs by whatever priority signal is available — search frequency if known, or otherwise the sequence a reader would naturally have these questions in — rather than defaulting to alphabetical order, which has no relationship to how important or common any given question actually is. Flag any of the provided real questions that would actually be better served by adding a new section or expanding an existing one in the main body, rather than as an FAQ entry — a question that keeps surfacing in the People Also Ask data because the post is currently missing that content entirely is a signal to edit the body, not just add a short FAQ answer that papers over a real gap.

OUTPUT FORMAT
1. The FAQ section, questions ordered by priority, each answer self-contained and at the target length.
2. A source note per question — which came from PAA data, which from support tickets.
3. Any real question flagged as better served by a body-content edit than an FAQ entry, with a one-line reason.