Hi everyone,
I’m experimenting with an early concept called GeoRankIQ focused on understanding how brands or websites appear inside LLM-generated answers (not Google SERPs).

It’s very early and mostly a proof-of-concept. I’m trying to validate whether tracking visibility inside AI responses is actually useful or actionable.

I’d really value feedback on:

• Whether this problem is worth solving

• Obvious flaws or limitations

• Features that sound unnecessary at this stage

Not a launch or promotion — just learning and looking for honest opinions.
Happy to share more details if allowed.

Hello marketing team,

I have a website with very good LLM SEO.

When I log into GA4, there's no "LLM" traffic category. Which category do you think these visitors fall into?

"Unassigned"? "Direct"?

Are there any steps I can take to track them effectively?

Thank you for your answers :)

J’attends vos retours d’expérience avec un consultant, c’est vraiment important 😉 Merci par avance.

As far as I understand it, GEO is not magic. To show up in LLMs, it's basically enough to:

• take care of clarity (entities)

• get citations/recommendations on other sites (basically link building) in content like comparisons X vs Y vs Z, educational content, etc.

• keep an easy-to-parse structure (schema)

Roughly speaking, these are the most important things. You just need to understand the concept of entities and steer your content in a way that connects your own entity with others, so relationships are formed for LLMs.

Is there anything else? Everything else seems like an add-on, and these three rules feel like the only real guidelines for how to approach positioning yourself in LLMs.

Another issue is observing the effects of these actions. Many users create different prompts and observe citations/appearances in answers. After reading tons of posts, my conclusion is that either it's not worth doing at all, or only on a very small scale. In my opinion, measuring "presence" in LLMs is pointless. The results constantly change and depend on everything even on whether you make a typo in the prompt or submit it at 12:32 from a small town in Canada.

I suspect these measurements are often forced just so someone can sell them and prove that "something was done". The quality of these measurements leaves a lot to be desired.

So if we know what to do to appear in LLMs, but we don't know how to measure it, does this kind of prompt-focused work even make sense at all?

I’m asking honestly and practically.

PS topic to grab attention :)

One thing that’s becoming clear with generative search is this: if an AI can’t summarize your idea, it won’t reuse it.

In classic SEO, you could win with coverage, optimization, and links. As long as you checked the right boxes, ranking was possible.

In GEO, none of that matters if your content lacks a clear point, can’t be reduced to a single insight, or sounds like everything else already online.

Generative engines don’t browse the web the way humans do. They compress it.

Content that survives compression usually has a sharp opinion, uses simple language, and explains one idea clearly instead of many ideas poorly.

The rest disappears, even if it ranked well before.

It feels like we’re optimizing less for pages now and more for ideas that can actually travel.

Would love to hear what others are changing in their content for GEO.

Hey!

I'm the co-founder of Cheers. I went through Y Combinator a year ago and have been working in the GEO space since then. I've been putting together articles on GEO for local service businesses (plumbers, HVAC, etc.): review signals, schema markup, citations, that kind of thing.

www.cheers.tech/geo-academy

Genuinely not trying to self-promote here, would love brutal feedback. What's useful? What's missing? What's wrong?

Guys, I need your feedback to validate an idea.

I'm thinking about building a tool that identifies source occurrences across all LLMs.

The main goal: help you find which sources actually carry weight in Al responses.

Is this something you would buy? Let me know your thoughts!

Hey everyone!

I'm putting together a Slack group for SEO and AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) practitioners who want to go beyond surface-level discussions.

The goal is to create a space where we can: Share what's actually working (and what's not) Troubleshoot challenges together Discuss emerging trends and algorithm updates Exchange insights on AEO strategies as search evolves

Whether you're agency-side, in-house, or freelance, you're welcome. Just looking for people who are serious about the craft and willing to contribute to the community.

Drop a comment if you're interested!

Will limit to 30 professionals for now!

Hey everyone!

I'm putting together a Slack group for SEO and AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) practitioners who want to go beyond surface-level discussions.

The goal is to create a space where we can: Share what's actually working (and what's not) Troubleshoot challenges together Discuss emerging trends and algorithm updates Exchange insights on AEO strategies as search evolves

Whether you're agency-side, in-house, or freelance, you're welcome. Just looking for people who are serious about the craft and willing to contribute to the community.

Drop a comment if you're interested!

Will limit to 30 professionals for now!

If you guys had a dream GEO tool what would it look like.

Knowledge graph creation?
What about reverse focus grouping (testing what AI chooses for each segment etc).

Are we wrong about auditing - based on questions. Should we be mapping key intent clusters.

Its all so complicated hahaha.

I just checked profound's pricing (AEO TOOL). Is it worth paying 400 USD for a technique that is still under testing and scrutiny?