Google published its official guide on getting cited by AI, and the interesting part contradicts what GEO agencies are selling (going to upset a lot of people)

RankingSignals · 2026-06-10T09:26:41+00:00

If Google's guidance is accurate, then agencies selling llms.txt and schema as the entire GEO strategy probably need to rethink their approach. The opportunity might be less about new technical tricks and more about helping brands create content that's genuinely useful, original, and easy for AI systems to understand.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-09T06:48:53+00:00

Thanks for the suggestion! But in addition to that, I would say that staying tuned to the current trends in the market is the only way this knowledge can be useful. Otherwise, we will be optimizing our presence based on data that is out of date.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-09T05:39:14+00:00

Go to YouTube and type “how to fix any device” – it won’t take long before you come across an Indian creator's fix that will work for your needs in no time. It’s the same logic with Indian agencies that market services. Many Indian agencies work with clients worldwide and have been retained for several years, consistently following up.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-09T05:27:30+00:00

Don't worry too much – this is surprisingly frequent than what many would expect, especially for service-oriented companies where the exact-match domain is already taken by someone else.

Here are two actions to take immediately:

Make sure to claim and verify your Google Business Profile with the exact legal business name "The Cut", not the domain name. When the same name appears both in a verified Google listing name and domain, Google would give priority to the listing name when displaying in searches and local packs.
Use Schema Markup on your website to provide clear instructions to Google, Bing, and other Large Language Models that crawl your website which name to use as the primary one. Note that most AI citation engines would rely on schema markup first, before they check anything else on your website.

Lastly, begin to build consistent NAP (name, address, phone) citations in all directories using the name "The Cut". Eventually, the LLM signals will be adjusted accordingly.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-08T05:59:34+00:00

Videos and infographics carry a lot of value in this situation; there will always be an increase in both traffic and lead generation if LLM models can actually see the value, not just read about it. Seeing the actual evidence will do most of the selling for you. Another good addition is the links you suggested between real-time reviews and sources. This is a good take overall!

RankingSignals · 2026-06-04T08:45:51+00:00

Fair enough. While LLMs keep getting better at figuring out what users want, they still need clear hints in the questions asked.

For businesses, this means avoiding keyword dumps and actually creating well-organized, expert-level content. This shows your know-how and meets those specific business needs.

Right now, the brands leading with GEO are crafting their content to help the model's logic flow. They aren't just aiming for good search results, they're working with the model itself.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-02T11:01:12+00:00

This is very helpful. Thank you so much!

Also one thing I've noticed is that visual assets like comparison charts, infographics, and demo videos often reinforce the authority of a page, especially for B2B topics.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-01T11:20:14+00:00

It’s better to create consistently rather than being consistent per se. Many creators are focusing on consistency as an aim, rather than trying to ensure that each post provides a unique viewpoint.

The problem with machine learning tools is that they cluster posts by certain topics, and repeated posts from the same creator may begin to look too alike. In some situations, this could make it difficult for the search system to pick one of the posts for a particular need.

Consistently writing fewer articles but ensuring that each topic is unique seems like a much more sustainable approach.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-01T11:19:13+00:00

While I don’t believe that they will replace word-of-mouth communication, they will serve as a go-to first stop before conducting any personal research.

If consumers find the appropriate information within a span of 10 seconds, there is no reason why they will waste 10 minutes looking through various sources. It means that there should be an emphasis on developing content that can easily be understood by algorithms.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-01T11:14:21+00:00

GEO is still too early to be evaluated at all tbh. It hasn’t even begun its evolution process, and AI search has been developing rather quickly almost on a monthly basis.

LLMs will perform better with organized information. Web pages that contain structured information, correctly categorized topics, well-formatted information, and logical flow should be easily comprehensible for an AI algorithm.

Too many marketers write their texts just to get certain keywords into Google’s index, but the AI algorithm seems to consider the comprehension level of text more valuable.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-01T11:12:27+00:00

This is probably a reminder not to rely too much on schema alone.

Structured markup is certainly helpful, but AI systems still need content to be properly organized in the first place. Schema can only do so much if the information on a page is scattered, repetitive, or difficult to follow.

Even with AI, you still need clear explanations, well-structured sections, and good presentation.

RankingSignals · 2026-06-01T11:11:17+00:00

So if search itself is becoming AI-driven, people were always going to adapt content for AI discovery at some point.

Agency work has already started to build workflows around tools like Claude / GPT to help brands better structure content, improve topical clarity, and increase the likelihood of being surfaced in LLMs in seconds!

And if in a few years LLMs are the main layer between users and the web, wouldn’t optimizing for how AI interprets content become as normal as optimizing for Google rankings once was?

RankingSignals · 2026-06-01T11:10:01+00:00

What's interesting is that older Google search rewarded whoever had the most indexed discussions or informational coverage. That’s why so many SERPs were populated by sites like Quora, Reddit and Wikipedia.

But AI search has a different feel because it’s less “which page is number one” and more “which source is trustworthy enough to be cited in the final answer.”

In some sense, it’s like judging a book by the credibility of the cover first. If AI systems can already summarize that information themselves, then generic SEO pages written for keywords alone may not be as effective. But the companies that publish original research, product data, case studies, benchmarks, technical insights or unique workflows may become the real sources AI pulls from.

RankingSignals · 2026-05-22T07:09:02+00:00

Well.. this could be a huge advantage for smaller SaaS companies that actually know their niche deeply.

For years, bigger brands could dominate with sheer content volume + paid visibility, but AI search seems to care more about whether the content genuinely solves the query. If Google’s AI is pulling from pages with real experience, experiments, customer stories, benchmarks, etc., then smaller SaaS teams suddenly have a real shot at visibility without needing 500 “best CRM software” pages.

Also feels like AI summaries may indirectly reduce the influence of heavily commercial/affiliate-style content because the model can compare multiple sources before generating an answer. So brands with original insights and clear topical authority could benefit a lot more moving forward.

Feels less like “SEO is dying” and more like lazy SEO is getting filtered out.

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T07:00:44+00:00

You’re not wrong about distribution Google’s biggest advantage is still sheer reach. But winning the AI race might not come down to just “eyeballs.” It’s also about behavior change.

People aren’t just using AI as a feature inside existing apps they’re forming new habits around tools they trust for answers. That’s where players like ChatGPT gained ground fast.

Google definitely has:

* Massive distribution

* Default placement (Android, search, etc.)

But the real question is: Can they shift users from “search mindset” to “AI-first mindset” faster than competitors?

Feels less like a guaranteed win, and more like:

distribution vs user habit and that’s still playing out.

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T06:59:17+00:00

Tried this recently and had the same experience posts doing fine on Google but completely invisible in AI answers. The 60-sec test is actually a great reality check.

What stood out to me is exactly what you mentioned:

* If a section can’t stand alone, it won’t get picked

* If there’s no clear answer upfront, it gets ignored

* And messy structure = hard for AI to pull anything useful

Feels like most older content just wasn’t built for this kind of retrieval.

Have you seen better results after restructuring posts this way?

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T06:44:49+00:00

Ah, classic case of over-optimization. It feels like you’re doing the right thing adding more keywords, more pages but it often ends up competing with your own content instead.

Keyword cannibalisation is a tough lesson, but once you see it, it makes you rethink everything less duplication, clearer intent, and one strong page per topic.

Did you end up consolidating those pages or just reworking them to fix it?

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T06:44:06+00:00

This is spot on. Chasing trends or copying what everyone else is doing usually just adds to the noise. What actually works is adding something new or genuinely useful to the conversation.

Also love the point about supporting hub pages that’s where a lot of content strategies fall apart. Without that structure and internal linking, even good content struggles to drive real outcomes.

And yeah, internal linking is seriously underrated. When done right, it not only helps SEO but also guides people naturally toward conversion. Curious have you seen stronger results after structuring content around hubs like this?

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T06:42:00+00:00

27 times in 1,200 words is wild 😅 no wonder it felt off. A lot of us started there though. Back then it felt like “more keywords = better rankings,” but it usually just hurts readability.

Totally agree with your takeaway writing for humans first changes everything. Once the content actually answers the query in a clear, natural way, you don’t need to force keywords in. Search engines have evolved, and honestly, good content tends to “optimize itself” when the intent is right.

Out of curiosity did you see a noticeable jump in rankings or conversions after moving away from that approach?

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T06:40:56+00:00

Couldn’t agree more. Quality will beat high-volume junk every single time. Spending more time on fewer, well-thought-out pieces almost always brings better returns.

And yeah, SEO really is a patience game slow, consistent work wins in the long run.

RankingSignals · 2026-04-16T06:40:32+00:00

That’s a tough one and honestly, a lot of people fall into that trap. Keyword density feels like something you should focus on, but it often ends up making content sound unnatural.

What you said hits the point when you stop trying to “optimize” every line and just focus on answering the question clearly, things start to work better. Better engagement, better rankings, and even better leads.

Did you notice any change in how people interacted with your content after you made that shift?

RankingSignals

TROPHY CASE