Our flagship AI SEO service combines technical SEO, entity authority, structured content, and citation acquisition into one system — so your brand shows up when someone asks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, or Claude a question your business should be answering.
A competitive brand in 2026 has to be found in three places simultaneously: classic organic search, AI-generated answers and overviews, and the conversational assistants people now open before they open Google. These are related but not identical problems, and a strategy built for one does not automatically solve the other two.
Most SEO agencies are still running a 2019 playbook — keywords, content volume, backlinks. That's a foundation, not a strategy. A growing share of high-intent research now begins inside an assistant that never shows a results page, and those systems decide who to cite based on retrieval access, entity clarity, and source credibility signals that most sites have never deliberately built.
We treat the storefront and the data layer as one system. Fast, crawlable, well-structured pages for classic SEO — plus the entity graph, schema coverage, and answer-shaped content that makes your brand legible to a model composing an answer on your behalf. Same site, two audiences, one build.
There is no universal right answer, and any agency that sells you a retainer before diagnosing anything is selling, not advising. Here is how we actually decide with new clients.
Best for: Brands with no baseline data, internal stakeholders to convince, or a suspicion that something technical is badly broken.
Best for: Teams who have already run a diagnostic, know their technical debt, and want execution capacity rather than another report.
Every engagement works through four dependent layers. Skipping one undermines the others — perfect content behind a blocked crawler earns nothing, and flawless crawl access on an unrecognized entity earns almost as little.
Whether AI crawlers can reach and render your pages at all — robots.txt directives, JavaScript rendering, response codes, and server-side output. This is where most sites silently fail before anything else matters.
Whether models can resolve who you are, what you sell, and why you're credible. Schema markup, sameAs corroboration, consistent naming, and third-party references that confirm your identity.
Whether your content is shaped so a passage can be lifted cleanly into a generated response — direct answers, clear headings, defined terms, and comparison content that resolves a real decision.
Whether credible third-party sources reference you. Models weight corroboration heavily; a claim that appears only on your own domain carries far less weight than one echoed elsewhere.
Every retainer covers the full stack — diagnosis, technical remediation, entity work, content architecture, citation acquisition, and monthly measurement — delivered as one integrated program rather than separately-billed modules.
A baseline diagnostic of crawler access, entity signals, schema coverage, and current citation share, benchmarked against the competitors who are winning your category's prompts today.
Fixing what actually blocks retrieval — robots.txt, rendering strategy, response codes, canonical logic, internal linking, and page performance across the templates that matter most.
Deploying Organization, Service, Product, FAQ, and Article schema correctly, plus the sameAs and knowledge-graph work that lets a model resolve your brand to a real entity.
Rewriting and building pages that lead with a direct answer, define their terms, and structure comparisons so a model can extract a clean, attributable passage.
Earning the third-party references models treat as evidence — authoritative placements, listings, and digital PR aimed at the sources that actually get retrieved.
Prompt-level tracking of where you appear across each platform, how that's moving, and which competitors are gaining — reported monthly with the next month's priorities attached.
A 40-page SaaS site and a 40,000-SKU catalog need fundamentally different architecture, schema strategy, and content priorities. We scope every engagement around your business model rather than a fixed template.
Buyers research software conversationally — comparisons, alternatives, integration questions. These are exactly the prompts assistants answer, and exactly where an unrecognized brand disappears.
Assistants increasingly answer product questions directly, and they lean hard on structured product data. Catalogs with thin or broken markup are invisible to that entire surface.
Large organizations fail at AI visibility for organizational reasons more than technical ones — inconsistent entity data across regions, brands, and teams that never reconciled.
A newer brand can't outspend incumbents on links, but can absolutely out-structure them. Entity clarity and answer-shaped content are where small teams still win quickly.
Every engagement runs on the RON Loop — six phases, run in order, then run again monthly. Nothing is a black box; each phase produces a named deliverable.
We crawl your site the way GPTBot, ClaudeBot, and PerplexityBot do, then show you page by page what they actually receive. It's usually less than you'd expect.
We map how models currently understand your brand, benchmark the prompts your category actually gets asked, and measure what share of those citations is yours today.
Technical remediation, schema rollout, and answer-first content restructuring — executed against the prioritized roadmap from the audit, not a generic checklist.
Earned citation work runs alongside monthly prompt-level reporting. Every month we identify what moved, what didn't, and where next month's effort goes.
We don't sell AI SEO as something separate from your organic performance, because it isn't. The same crawlable, credible, well-structured site feeds both a ranking algorithm and a language model — the difference is what each one does with it.
The questions marketing leaders ask us most before starting. If yours isn't here, ask us directly on a consultation call.
AI SEO is the practice of optimizing a brand to be found, understood, and cited by AI systems that generate answers — ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and Google's AI Overviews — rather than only ranking in a list of blue links.
It shares a foundation with traditional SEO: both need a crawlable, fast, credible, well-structured site. The difference is what happens next. A ranking algorithm sorts pages; a language model composes an answer and names three or four sources. Traditional SEO optimizes for position. AI SEO optimizes for being one of those named sources.
No, and you should be skeptical of anyone who says it does. Traditional SEO remains the foundation — if your site isn't crawlable, fast, and credible, it won't be retrieved by anything, ranking algorithm or language model.
What AI SEO adds is a layer on top: entity resolution, schema depth, answer-shaped content structure, and third-party citation building. In practice, most of that work improves classic organic performance at the same time.
Retrieval fixes can move things fastest. If a crawler is blocked or your pages render empty, unblocking that can change visibility within weeks of the next crawl cycle.
Entity authority and citation building are slower — typically two to four months before meaningful movement, because they depend on third-party sources being published and then re-crawled. We plan engagements on a 90-day first-movement window and report monthly throughout, so you're never guessing.
It's measurable, just not through the tools most teams already have. We build a benchmarked prompt set — typically 40 to 60 questions your category actually gets asked — and track, per platform, whether your brand appears, in what position, and against which competitors.
That produces a citation share figure that moves month over month. It isn't as clean as rank tracking, and we'll tell you where the uncertainty lies rather than pretending to a precision that doesn't exist.
ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google Gemini, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, and Google AI Overviews. Classic Google organic sits underneath all of it as the retrieval foundation.
The underlying work overlaps heavily across platforms — crawl access, entity clarity, and credible sources help everywhere. Platform-specific tactics matter at the margin, and we cover those on our individual platform pages.
No, and any agency offering that guarantee is either misunderstanding how these systems work or misrepresenting it. Model outputs are probabilistic, vary by phrasing, and change with every model update.
What we do commit to is the work being measurable: a documented baseline, a defined prompt set, monthly reporting on movement, and a clear account of what changed and why. You'll always know whether it's working.
Most of our clients are between 10 and 500 employees — SaaS, B2B, ecommerce, and technology brands with an established site and real revenue to protect. We also run enterprise engagements above that.
We're a poor fit for pre-launch startups with no site to optimize, and for businesses wanting a bundled package including paid media and social. We only do AI search visibility.
Standalone audits typically run in the low five figures as a one-off. Ongoing retainers generally start around $4,000–$10,000 per month for focused engagements, and $10,000–$25,000+ for competitive or enterprise programs.
Scope drives the number: site size, catalog complexity, how much technical remediation is needed, and how much citation-building work the market requires. Full detail is on our pricing page.
Yes, and it's a common arrangement. We frequently handle the AI visibility layer while an internal team or incumbent agency continues running content production and classic SEO.
It works best when responsibilities are explicit — we'll define who owns technical implementation, who owns publishing, and where handoffs happen, in writing, before work starts.
Analytics and Search Console access, CMS or developer access for technical implementation, and a named internal contact who can approve changes. For catalogs, product feed access as well.
The single biggest predictor of a successful engagement is having someone internally who can get technical changes shipped. Where that's a bottleneck, we'll scope implementation support rather than hand you a report you can't action.
We'll benchmark your brand against the prompts your category actually gets asked, show you who's being cited instead of you, and tell you what it would take to change that.
No commitment · 45 minutes · Immediate value
We’ll run your category’s real questions live on the call and tell you honestly whether this is worth your budget. No pitch deck.
Two fields. We’ll crawl your site as GPTBot, ClaudeBot and PerplexityBot, benchmark a sample of your category’s prompts, and send you what we find.
No commitment, no sales sequence. If we’re not a fit, we’ll say so.