Tracked monthly since May 2026 · ChatGPT + Perplexity · our own money, our own products
Two products. One playbook. One owns 13% of its niche's AI answers. The other: zero.
When your buyers ask ChatGPT what to use, it cites 5–10 sources. Those slots are the new page one. We ran the same GEO playbook on two of our own products for three months — the winner was predictable on day one, before writing a single article. For $300, we run the same measurement on your niche and show you exactly where you can win.
The new page one
Your buyers stopped googling. The citations didn't stop.
Every AI answer about your category cites a handful of sources — and those sources get the click, the trust, and the customer. Someone already holds your slots. Most companies have never once measured who. That's the entire question the audit answers: who holds them, and which ones you can take.
What $300 buys
Not a dashboard. A verdict, a map, and a route.
Delivered in 48 hours as a written report plus a 30-minute readout. See a real sample report → Contents:
- 01Your answer-slot share Across ~20 buyer-intent questions in ChatGPT and Perplexity — the number almost nobody knows about themselves.
- 02Competitor shares The same measurement for your top 5 rivals. Who is actually winning the answers — often not who you think.
- 03Slot-holder analysis, query by query Who holds every slot you're missing: indie blogs, Reddit threads, review sites, or entrenched incumbents.
- 04The where-you-can-win map Head terms may be closed. Narrower intents almost never are — even our losing niche had open doors. You get the map of yours.
- 05Prioritized intent hit-list The specific queries to go after first, in order of winnability.
- 06Why your pages aren't cited A teardown of 1–2 of your pages against the pages engines actually cite for the same question.
- 07The recommended play Content, community, or listings — dictated by who holds your slots, not by what we'd like to sell you.
Who holds the slots decides the strategy
Three doors. Your audit says which one is open.
The content play
Outpublish them with an accurate, interlinked topic cluster. This is the route we took ourselves.
→ our 3% → 13% caseThe community play
Engines keep citing the same threads. Be genuinely present in them instead of publishing into a void.
→ blogging can't win here — we'll say soThe listings play
When G2 and Capterra own the answers, the profile is the battleground — win the listing, not the blog.
→ cheaper than a content retainerClaims discipline
What we will never tell you
- "We guarantee citations."Nobody can. The two engines disagree with each other 36% of the time on the same page. Anyone promising placements is lying to you.
- "We'll get this exact page cited."In half of our own citation events, engines picked a different page of ours than the one built for that query. You grow a cluster's share, not a page's rank.
- "GEO works for everyone."We own a 0% result and publish it. Some niches are closed to content — and if yours is, we'll prescribe the cheaper play instead of selling you articles.
What we can show you, with receipts: in a winnable niche, consistent accurate publishing compounds — ours went 3% → 13% in three months — and winnability is measurable before you spend anything.
Pricing
Start with the measurement.
- Full 7-part report (above)
- ~20 queries × 2 engines, raw data attached
- 30-min readout call
- Agencies: white-label per client domain
- Same measurement, re-run monthly
- Trend report — the signal is the trajectory
- Alerts when you gain or lose slots
- Publish-ready, fact-verified articles
- Targeting your audited open intents
- Every competitor claim verified by hand
Fair questions
Asked by people who almost didn't buy
Can't I just ask ChatGPT about my product myself?
Yes — once. The measurement is 20 buyer-intent queries (chosen to match how buyers actually ask), across two engines, repeated monthly, with the ~36% engine disagreement filtered out. And a number without a benchmark is trivia: our before/after dataset is what tells you whether your 4% means "early and climbing" or "stuck." You're buying calibrated interpretation, not API calls.
We already use an AI-visibility dashboard.
Dashboards report numbers. This is a verdict and a route: which specific intents are open, who holds every slot you're missing, and which of the three plays fits — benchmarked against the only public same-operator win-and-loss dataset we know of. Keep the dashboard; it'll be useful for watching the plan work.
Is $300 worth it?
It's less than 1% of a typical quarterly GEO retainer, delivered before you sign one instead of after. One of our own two products would have burned five figures on an unwinnable niche — the audit-grade measurement caught it. That's the purchase: spending $300 to aim the real money.
Who's behind this?
A solo operator — the same person who ran the case study on this page, on their own products, with their own money. Every number here comes from real tracker runs; the raw JSON is available on request.
Know your share before you spend.
One measurement now beats a retainer's worth of guessing. If your niche is closed to content, you'll know that too — and what to do instead.
Request your audit — $300 Reply within 24h · report within 48h of kickoff