Martin Williams @martincoderra

@randfish A waste of time if you sell it as a traffic channel. Not if the client's real question is why ChatGPT recommends someone else. Being named in the answer is a brand problem, and it shows up in branded search and sales calls, not GA4 referrals.

@lilyraynyc Love this. The About page is the one page where a brand explains plainly who it is, what it does and why you should trust it. That's exactly what an AI answer needs. It's also the page most agencies never put in the brief.

Three studies this week say AI search sends almost no traffic. Fair enough. But your clients aren't asking about clicks. They're asking why ChatGPT recommends someone else. Agencies that win here will sell visibility, measure it honestly and stop promising traffic.

@gaetano_nyc Agree. The AI answer often builds the shortlist and Google just catches the branded search afterwards. That's why last-click reporting undersells AI visibility. Worth tracking branded search lift alongside citations.

@DynamicBusiness The demand here is real. The next question Aussie businesses should ask is how it gets measured: which prompts, which assistants, and what the baseline looked like before any work started. Without that, nobody can prove it moved.

@ConnorGillivan @semrush Spot on. A brand can look strong in one assistant and barely exist in another, so a single AI visibility score hides the real story. Report it by platform, then by prompt, or clients end up optimising for an average that no buyer ever sees.

@alexgroberman Good to see Google putting AI search data where retailers already look. The next thing ecommerce clients will ask their agency is which products are getting named and which aren't. Worth having a view on that before they ask.

@rustybrick @glenngabe If this sticks, AI Overview tracking gets harder for agencies. Plenty of trackers and manual checks lean on that label to spot an AIO. Clients will still see the answer, they just won't know it's AI, and some reports won't either.

@lilyraynyc Same question we keep asking. If one prompt cites different sources run to run, overlap between models tells you very little. Better to run each prompt many times and report how often a brand shows up. That's the number that actually holds still.

Agencies: AI search work is easy to sell and hard to prove. Before you pitch it, agree with the client which buyer questions matter and where they stand today in ChatGPT and Google's AI answers. Without that baseline, any win you report later is just a screenshot.

@SEOforSmallBus Good shout, and the specific claim bit is the key. "Same-day hot water repairs on the North Shore" gives an AI answer something to quote. "We're here to help" doesn't. Worth every local agency adding it to the monthly checklist.

@lilyraynyc The agency version of this: before a client publishes another "top 10 tools" page, ask who it actually helps. If the list leans on the category leaders, it's mostly more evidence for them in AI answers, not for the client.

@glenngabe This is the check agencies should run before pitching AI visibility work. If a client's key pages need JavaScript to show their content, ChatGPT and Perplexity may not be seeing them at all. Fix that first, then talk about prompts.

@matdegaulle The selection point is the one that matters commercially. Buyers don't ask for the best X, they ask for the best X for their size, market and setup. If the proof isn't somewhere AI can verify, you drop off the shortlist. Track those prompts, not just category ones.

@sitebulb @mediaprosperity Great to see Australia-specific data on this. Most GEO advice is built on US results, and local agencies need local evidence when a client asks why they're not in the AI answer. Keen to read the full breakdown.

@BennyPoulton Love that it was mostly SEO content tweaks. That's the bit agencies miss: AI search visibility sits on the same fundamentals, just shaped around the real questions buyers ask. Are ChatGPT, Claude and AI Overviews naming you for those terms yet, or Google first?

Agencies: your clients will soon ask why ChatGPT recommends a competitor and not them. Rankings won't answer that. Knowing which buyer questions they're missing from, and fixing the pages AI can't verify, will. Better to have that answer before the client asks.

@webjuice_ie This is the split we're seeing with commercial buyers too: #1 on Google doesn't guarantee you get named in the AI answer. Ranking gets you into the index; citation needs entity clarity, answer-shaped content, and proof AI can reuse. Curious what moved the needle most

@EntrepreneurDB Agree. Zero-click is mostly a SERP layout problem, not ChatGPT eating Google. For B2B, the practical move is still: win the Overview citation and the traditional result, because buyers bounce between both before they talk to sales.

@alexgroberman Most B2B teams still treat AI search like a side quest. The ones winning treat citation + classic SEO as one pipeline: same ICP questions, clearer answers, stronger proof. Happy to compare notes on what shows up in ChatGPT vs AI Overviews for commercial queries.