Presence at the research stage
Being named puts you in the shortlist before any site visit.
When a buyer asks ChatGPT to recommend a supplier in your category, a handful of brands get named. If yours is not one of them, your ranking on Google is irrelevant to that conversation.
Four causes, all of which are addressable — none of which are a ranking problem.
Assistants need an unambiguous description of your business, category and location. A homepage of positioning language and an about page of adjectives gives them nothing to work with.
Different descriptions on your site, LinkedIn, directories and press. Where sources conflict, systems fall back on whoever is consistent — which will be a competitor.
Long unstructured pages where the useful answer is buried in paragraph nine. There is no extractable sentence to lift and attribute.
These systems draw heavily on established publications, industry sites and aggregators. If your brand never appears in them, there is nothing to retrieve.
We work on the inputs these systems demonstrably rely on: a clearly defined entity, consistent facts wherever your brand appears, structured data stating your identity, and content written so a specific answer can be lifted and attributed accurately.
We will not tell you we can rank you in ChatGPT. Nobody controls what these systems output, there is no submission process, and the behaviour changes frequently. What we can do is improve the signals, measure whether citations increase, and report honestly either way.
You are not competing for a ranking position. You are competing to be one of a few sources the system trusts enough to name.
Being named puts you in the shortlist before any site visit.
Most competitors are not doing this. That window is finite.
Entity clarity and structure lift conventional rankings as well.
People arriving from an AI recommendation are already warm.
Fixing your entity data helps everywhere it appears.
Citation tracking turns a vague worry into a reported metric.
A defined set of buying questions tested across assistants; who is named, and who is not.
Every public description of your business gathered and checked for contradictions.
Structured data implemented, crawlability confirmed, facts reconciled.
Priority pages restructured and new answer-led content produced.
Citation opportunities pursued on sources these systems actually read.
The same questions asked again, with results tracked and strategy adjusted.
What we will never claim. We do not offer 'rank #1 in ChatGPT' and you should be wary of anyone who does. These systems have no ranking API, no submission process and no guarantees available to anyone. We improve discoverability and measure it.
Every engagement is scoped individually. These ranges give you a realistic idea of investment before you speak to us.
Prices are in USD and indicative starting points for scoping — final quotes depend on scope, competition and current site condition. [Confirm or edit these figures before launch.]
Project slots are ready for real client work — screenshots, brand names and outcomes drop straight into these cards.
Replace with baseline, work done and citation change.
Replace with contradictions found and resolved.
Replace with content restructured and the result.
Metrics below are editable placeholders. They will be replaced with verified client results — nothing here is invented.
No, and neither can anyone else. There is no submission process, no ranking API and no transparency into how sources are selected — and the behaviour changes frequently. Anyone guaranteeing placement is selling something they cannot deliver. We improve the signals these systems demonstrably rely on and measure whether citations increase.
The foundations overlap almost entirely — a site that cannot be crawled or has no credibility will not be cited either. The differences are emphasis: entity clarity, factual consistency across the web and extractable answers matter more here than ranking position does.
We define a set of buying-relevant questions, test them across the major assistants on a schedule, and record whether you are named, cited or absent — and who appears instead. It is sampling rather than a complete picture, because no exhaustive data exists, but tracked consistently it shows real movement.
Increasingly, at the research stage — shortlisting suppliers, comparing options, understanding a category. It is displacing some early-stage search behaviour rather than replacing search outright, which is exactly where being on the shortlist matters.
Yes, and first. These systems still crawl the web and still weight authority and consistency. AI visibility work sits on top of a sound technical and content foundation, not instead of it.
As best anyone can establish from observation: clear entity definition, consistent facts across sources, content structured so an answer can be extracted, genuine topical depth, and presence in the publications these systems draw from. Nobody outside these companies knows the weightings.
Entity and consistency fixes can show within weeks as sources are recrawled. Corroboration and citation building takes months. We re-test monthly so you can see the trend rather than waiting for a verdict.
We will test the questions your buyers actually ask across the major assistants and show you where you appear, where competitors appear, and what is being cited instead of you.
No obligation. If we are not the right fit for your goals, we will say so.