AI is recommending someone right now. Make it you.

Yes, and it is the foundation rather than a side offer. Technical SEO, content strategy, editorial link building, programmatic SEO and international SEO are the stack, and Ben has 15+ years of it at exchange scale. GEO is built on top of that work, not instead of it, because engines assemble answers out of pages that already rank, get linked and get mentioned. Cutting SEO to fund AI visibility is cutting the supply line to fund the front.

Less than the people selling you a second retainer would like. Engines assemble answers out of pages that already rank, get linked and get mentioned, so most good SEO work already feeds GEO. Across 15,000 long tail prompts, Ahrefs found only 12% of AI cited URLs ranked in Google's top 10 for the prompt that was typed. Ranking helps and does not decide. The new money is the conversational long tail, and that is where we hunt.

ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini and Google AI Overviews. The more useful answer is that they disagree with each other constantly. Running the same questions across all of them, we routinely see a brand cited well on one engine and absent from another, and in one scan of a crypto protocol, ChatGPT declined to search the web at all on a third of its runs. Optimizing for one engine and assuming the others follow is how brands end up invisible on two out of three.

Against a fixed prompt set, and fixed is the whole point. A number that moves because someone changed the questions is a story, not a measurement. We build the set once, hold it constant, and run it quarterly for AI share of voice per engine, mention share, accuracy and AI referral traffic. We also run every question several times, because engines are non-deterministic: in one scan of a public protocol, seven of eighteen contradictions showed up in only one run out of three. Ask once and a third of what you report is noise you cannot see.

Usually, and not by patching the answer. Nobody can edit a model. What we can do is find the pages the engine cited when it got you wrong, which is very often your own documentation, and rebuild the signal there. A wrong answer is rarely a typo. It is what an engine concludes when the stale version of a fact is easier to find than the current one.

No, and we would rather say so before you ask. We deliver strategy, architecture and detailed briefs; your team or your writers execute them. In crypto and fintech that also keeps compliance review where it legally belongs, which is inside your business and not inside your agency.

No. We plug in. The clients who get the most from this keep content and development in-house and hand us the parts that need a specialist: architecture, GEO and authority. An agency that replaces your team also walks out with your product knowledge when the contract ends.

Because the cost of a wrong answer is different here. If an engine misstates a hotel check-in time, somebody is mildly annoyed. If it misstates your custody model, your fee structure or your incident history, that is a compliance exposure with your name on it. Ben built the SEO-driven organic engine at a top 5 global crypto exchange across 10+ markets, so we know the category and the stakes. We work with ambitious tech companies too, but this is where we are sharpest.

No one controls what AI says. We control every input it reads, and we measure the output in the open.