Getting cited by ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google's AI answers.
A growing share of buyers now ask an assistant instead of running a search. They get one answer with a handful of sources, and the brands inside that answer make the shortlist. Generative engine optimisation is the work of becoming one of those sources — different from SEO in what it optimises for, overlapping in how it is built.
The problem
Nobody in the business has checked what ChatGPT or Perplexity says when asked to recommend a provider in your category. If a competitor is named and you are not, you never find out — the buyer simply doesn't call.
Most AI search sessions end without anyone clicking through to a website. If your only strategy is ranking a page for a click that no longer happens, the strategy is already out of date.
~93%
of AI search sessions end without a click to a websitesource ↗
Long, unsourced, undated pages built for a 2019 reader. Models lift specifics — figures, definitions, comparisons with clear attribution — and skip prose that commits to nothing.
30–40%
higher visibility in AI responses for content carrying statistics and citationssource ↗
What we do
We run the prompts your buyers would run, across ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews, and record who gets named. That baseline is the whole basis of the programme.
Clear headings, direct answers up top, defined terms, visible dates, sourced numbers, and schema. Make the page easy to quote correctly.
Models look for agreement across independent sources before naming a brand confidently. Directories, comparison sites, forums, review platforms and earned coverage all feed that.
Honest comparisons, pricing, limitations, and 'who this is not for'. These are disproportionately what assistants quote, because they answer the question directly.
Citation share by prompt and platform, tracked over time. Recently updated pages earn noticeably more citations, so freshness is a scheduled task rather than an afterthought.
What you get
How we’re different
There is a lot of consultancy in this space that cannot show whether anything changed. We report the named-in-answer rate for a fixed prompt set, month over month.
Pricing, honest comparisons, who you are wrong for. They are what gets quoted, and most competitors will not run them.
The structural work overlaps heavily. Doing both together costs less than buying them from two vendors who each blame the other.
Questions we get
The plumbing overlaps — structure, schema, authority. The objective doesn't. SEO optimises to be clicked; GEO optimises to be quoted, including in answers that never send a visitor. You need both, and they are cheaper bought together.
A fixed set of buyer prompts, run monthly across the major assistants, with your named-in-answer rate tracked over time. It is not a perfect measure — model answers vary between runs — so we sample repeatedly and report the trend rather than a single lucky result.
No, and be wary of anyone who does. There is no submission form and no ranking to buy. What we can do is make you the easiest brand in your category to cite correctly, and show you whether that is moving.
Where the numbers come from
Figures are industry benchmarks published by third parties, cited so you can check them. They describe the market, not a promise about your results.
We'll run your category's buying prompts and send you the answers, with who got named and why.
Usually paired with
Found where it counts — in the map pack, and in the searches that convert.
Read →The plan that decides what gets made, for whom, and what it is supposed to do.
Read →Reach that compounds instead of resetting every time you stop paying.
Read →Fast, owned and built to convert — not a template with your logo on it.
Read →