Generative engine optimization services that make you the answer

Ask ChatGPT who to hire and it names a short list of companies. Ask Perplexity the same question and the list is usually different. Ask Claude and it is shorter still, often built from a review site. None of those answers is a list of ten blue links, and none of them is decided the way a Google ranking is decided.

That is the problem GEO solves. Our job is to get you into those answers, one engine at a time, and to show you whether it worked.

What is generative engine optimization?

It is the work of making a brand easy for an answer engine to find, read, trust and quote.

Three parts, in the order they usually matter. First, access: the engine has to be able to fetch your pages at all. Second, readability: the page has to state plain facts in short passages a model can lift without guessing. Third, presence: the engine has to meet your name somewhere other than your own site, because most engines lean on third-party pages when a buyer asks who to hire.

Most companies fail on the first and third and spend all their money on the second.

Where do AI answers actually come from?

Not from one place. This is the single most useful thing to understand about GEO, and it is the thing most agencies get wrong.

ChatGPT search answers from OpenAI's own index, topped up with search data licensed from Google and Microsoft and a small set of partner sources. It is not a Bing wrapper. Perplexity runs its own index and also crawls pages live while it answers you. Claude searches Anthropic's own index. The Gemini app is grounded in Google Search. Google AI Overviews and AI Mode read Google's index, but they break your question into several smaller ones and fetch pages for each, so the sources often sit well outside the top ten results. Copilot reads Bing.

Because the indexes differ, the answers differ, and the overlap between what any two of them cite for the same question is small. So "optimise for AI" is not a plan. Optimising for a named engine is.

What does each engine cite?

We work each of these as its own project: ChatGPT optimization, Perplexity optimization, Claude optimization and Google AI Overviews and AI Mode. Before any of it starts, we run an AI visibility audit so we know where you stand today.

Which crawlers do you need to let in?

More than most sites currently allow, and the block is usually accidental.

The search crawlers are the ones that decide citations: OAI-SearchBot and ChatGPT-User for ChatGPT, PerplexityBot and Perplexity-User for Perplexity, Claude-SearchBot and Claude-User for Claude, Googlebot for AI Overviews, AI Mode and Gemini, and Bingbot for Copilot. Block any of them and you are not in that engine, whatever else you do.

The most common cause is not a robots.txt line at all. It is a security product with an "AI bots" preset switched on by someone who never linked it to marketing. We check every crawler by name with a live fetch, fix the rules, then fetch again to prove it. The same pass usually catches snippet limits and no-snippet tags, which quietly tell an engine it may not quote the page.

Does llms.txt help?

No, and it is worth saying plainly because a lot of budget went into it.

Google stated in June 2026 that the file has no effect on how its systems work. A study of 137,000 domains found that 97 percent of published llms.txt files received no requests at all. No answer engine uses it to decide citations.

Publish one if coding agents fetch your documentation. Do not publish one and call it AI visibility work, and be careful with any agency that sells it as the main deliverable.

Does FAQ markup still earn a rich result?

Not in Google. FAQPage rich results were retired in May 2026, and the reporting for them was removed from Search Console soon after.

The markup itself is harmless and some engines still read it, so we keep it where it mirrors visible text. What we do not do is add a question block to a page just to chase a snippet that no longer exists. The visible questions and answers are the part that has always done the work.

What kind of page gets quoted?

Short, specific and sourced. The research on generative engines is consistent about the ingredients.

+30% to +40%

So we write pages that answer the question in two or three sentences under the heading, then support it. Headings are phrased as the sub-questions an engine splits your query into: price, timeline, deliverables, guarantees, reporting. Sections stay short enough to lift whole. Each page carries at least one number with a named source and a table, because tables are quoted far more often than prose.

None of that is a trick. It is the same shape that helps a person who is skimming with a decision to make.

Where does your name need to appear?

Off your own site, on the pages those engines already read.

For "who should we hire" questions, the pattern is stable across engines: review platforms, professional company profiles, and honest comparison lists written by someone else. Brands present on several review platforms are cited several times more often than brands absent from all of them. Community forums are large in the totals and close to invisible for vendor questions, which is why we do not send clients to post on them.

So part of GEO is unglamorous listing work: consistent name, address and contact details everywhere, a complete company profile on the platforms buyers use, real reviews collected properly, and coverage in lists we did not write. It overlaps with the work on the SEO services side, and we run them from one plan so nobody does it twice.

Which engine should we start with?

The one your buyers use, which is not always the one with the biggest headlines.

We work that out in the audit rather than assuming it. If your category question already returns an AI Overview for most of your terms, Google is the first project, because that answer sits above every result you already rank for. If your buyers are technical and research heavily, Perplexity usually matters more than its market share suggests. If your product is bought after a long shortlist, Claude and ChatGPT both lean on the same review platforms, so one piece of listing work serves two engines.

In practice we open access everywhere at once, because that costs the same for one engine or six, then concentrate the writing and outreach on two engines first. Spreading a small budget thinly across six engines is the most common way GEO money gets wasted.

What do you ship each month?

Work you can point at, not a slide about momentum.

A typical month has four kinds of output. Page work: two to six pages rewritten or written so the answer sits at the top and the facts are sourced. Access work: crawler rules, rendering fixes, markup corrections, verified with a fetch. Presence work: profiles completed, review requests sent through a process you approved, and pitches to the lists and publications the audit named. Measurement: the prompt set re-run and the gap explained.

Every item lands in your portal with the URL, the file or the ticket attached. If a month is heavy on outreach and light on published pages, the report says so and says why, because pretending otherwise is how agencies end up shipping filler.

What if we already rank well in Google?

Good, and it helps less than you would expect.

Ranking in the top ten is a strong signal for AI Overviews and AI Mode, since both read Google's index. It is a much weaker signal elsewhere, because the engines that run their own index pick sources their own way. Even inside Google, the overlap between AI Overview sources and the organic top ten is far from complete.

So a site that ranks well starts ahead on one engine and level on the rest. The gap is usually presence, not pages: the review profile that does not exist, the comparison list that names five competitors and not you, the company profile last updated three years ago. That work is different from ranking work, and it is why we scope GEO as its own project rather than folding it into an SEO retainer as an extra line.

What if an engine says something wrong about you?

We treat it as a content problem, not a complaint problem.

Models repeat what they read. A wrong price, a discontinued product or a merged company name usually traces back to a source page that is out of date: an old profile, a stale directory entry, a press piece nobody corrected. So the fix is to find the sources the engine used, correct or replace them, and publish an unambiguous page of your own that states the current fact plainly with a date on it.

That usually works over weeks rather than days, and it works better than asking an engine to change its mind. Where a source will not correct itself, the next best move is to outweigh it: more recent, clearer, better-sourced pages saying the right thing in the places the engine already trusts.

Do you still need technical SEO for this?

Yes, and it is the part people skip.

An engine that cannot render your page sees an empty page. Several fetch the raw HTML and never run your JavaScript, so a template that paints its text after a script runs is invisible to them. Redirect chains lose the fetch. A slow server times out. Markup that contradicts the visible page reads as noise.

That is ordinary technical SEO work, and it is the floor GEO is built on. We check it first because everything after it depends on the engine getting a clean copy of the page.

How do you measure AI visibility?

With a fixed prompt set, run on more than one engine, on a schedule.

We agree 20 to 40 questions a buyer would actually type: category questions, comparison questions, questions about your competitors, and questions about you by name. Then we run them weekly and record three things: whether you were named, whether you were linked, and which sources the engine used instead of you.

That last column is the useful one. It tells us exactly which page to get you onto next, and it is the reason our reports name competitors and publications rather than a single invented visibility score.

We also read the first-party data. Search Console reports AI Mode and AI Overviews performance, and Bing's tools show per-page Copilot citations. Those are the only numbers that come from the engines themselves, so they anchor everything else.

What happens in the first 90 days?

Ninety days is enough to fix access, publish a first set of quotable pages and see movement on some prompts. It is usually not enough to win a crowded category question outright, and we will say so before you sign.

How do GEO, SEO and CRO fit together?

They are three answers to the same question: does this visit turn into money.

SEO gets you into the results page. GEO gets you into the answer above it. Then CRO services decide what happens once someone lands. Traffic from AI answers arrives with the question half-answered, so the page it lands on has a different job than a page that catches a broad search.

Run them together and each makes the next cheaper. The same audit feeds all three. The same page rewrite that makes a section quotable also makes it skimmable for a buyer. The same technical fix serves both crawlers.

Who is GEO for, and who should wait?

It is for companies whose buyers research before they contact anyone, and whose category is one an engine gets asked about.

That is most considered purchases: software, professional services, clinics, equipment, anything with a shortlist stage. If your buyers ask a model for options before they ask a person, you want to be in that answer.

Wait, or spend elsewhere first, in three cases. If your site is not indexable at all, fix that before anything else. If you have no facts you are willing to publish, GEO has nothing to work with, because engines quote specifics. And if nobody can approve a change to your pages, the plan stalls the same way an SEO plan does.

Do you work in Arabic as well as English?

Yes. We deliver in English and Arabic, and for GEO the two are separate projects rather than a translation job.

Engines answer the language of the question. Ask the same buying question in Arabic and in English and you often get different companies, different sources and a different number of citations, because the pool of pages the engine can draw on is not the same size in each language. In practice the Arabic pool is thinner, which cuts both ways: less competition, and fewer trusted third-party sources to appear on.

So we run the prompt set in both languages, report them separately, and write Arabic pages as originals with their own facts and their own sources. A machine translation of an English page is worse than nothing here, because it reads as derivative to the engine and as awkward to the buyer.

How long does GEO usually take?

Access changes land fast. Presence changes do not.

Opening a blocked crawler often changes what an engine can see within days, because live-fetch engines re-read the page the next time somebody asks. Page rewrites usually start showing up over four to eight weeks as each engine refreshes its index. Third-party presence, which is the part that matters most for "who should we hire" questions, usually takes two to four months, because it depends on review cycles and other people's publishing schedules.

Anyone promising citations in 30 days is selling a screenshot, not a result.

What does not work in GEO?

The list is short and expensive.

Publishing an llms.txt file and calling it a strategy. Stuffing schema onto pages that say nothing new. Buying an "AI visibility score" from a tool without fixing the pages the engine has to read. Chasing forum threads for questions where forums are almost never cited. Writing the same page six times with a different engine name at the top.

One more, and it is the one that costs the most: publishing at machine speed with no named author and no original material. Search engines spent 2026 removing sites that did exactly that, and answer engines lean on the same signals of who wrote this and why it should be believed.

What do you need from us?

Facts and one decision-maker.

We need the things only you know: your prices, your process, your policies, the detail that makes a page worth quoting instead of paraphrasing. We need access to the site or a developer who can ship. And we need one person who can approve a plan and answer a question inside a week.

We will not invent a number to fill a paragraph, and we will not publish a claim about your business that you have not confirmed. That is partly integrity and partly self-interest: an engine that quotes a wrong fact about you is worse than one that ignores you.

How much do GEO services cost?

Flat monthly retainers, with starting prices on the pricing page. The scope that moves the number is how many engines and prompts we track, how many pages need rewriting, how much third-party listing and outreach work the audit calls for, and whether SEO and CRO run in the same plan.

Plans are month to month. You can stop at the end of any month.

How do we start?

Book a free 30-minute consultation. We check crawler access for each major engine, whether your key text exists in the raw HTML, and what your markup actually says, then name the first three things to fix.

If the findings look worth acting on, book a call and we will scope the work. If your problem turns out to be a search problem or a conversion problem rather than a GEO problem, we will tell you that instead.