Same work, same end result, and we do all of it either way. The only difference is how fast it lands and what we are willing to promise.
Everything built and live inside a month. Then we watch it, and so can you.
Built in a month. Then if no Google knowledge panel has appeared within three months, you get every penny back. We aim to get you one and we carry the risk of it ourselves, which is what the money back is for.
The same things, built one at a time. Stop whenever you like and keep what has already been done.
Not a strategy and not a retainer. Five things that either exist or do not, each with an address you can send to somebody.
Yours. It stays up whether or not you carry on paying us, because taking it down would break the very thing you bought.
The same one ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity read. This is the piece that produces a panel, and the piece almost nobody has.
Crunchbase, about.me and Wikitia, set up and made to agree with each other and with your page. Disagreement is what stops a name settling.
Written properly and published under your name. More on how that works below.
Titles change, sites go down, a promotion breaks the agreement everywhere at once. We find it and fix it before you notice.
This is the part people assume is PR, and it is not. A press release is something you send. An article is something somebody publishes with your name on it.
Thought leadership. An argument about your own industry that you are qualified to make and most of your competitors are not. It has to say something, because a piece that says nothing gets read by nobody and linked to by nobody.
Interviews and Q and As. Where the story is you rather than the argument. How the business started, what changed, what you would tell somebody doing it now.
Real publications with real editors, in your sector. We place where the readership is plausibly your customer, because a citation from a title that would credibly cover you is worth more than one from a title that would not.
Those sites are indexed by Google and read by the AI assistants, which is the whole point: it becomes something they can find and quote when somebody asks who you are.
We research it. We read your site, your filings and anything already published about you, and we build the piece from that. You are not sent a form or asked to supply links.
Then we check every figure against its original source. On the last one we did, three statistics the client had been publishing for months did not survive that check. They came out. It is your name on the piece.
Read it, and say yes. Usually one round of changes. Nothing is submitted anywhere until you have approved the words, because your name is on the byline and the last word has to be yours.
The listings say who you are. Articles are what make that hold up, and they are what a person actually reads when they look you up before a meeting. We research the piece, write it, and place it. You approve every word before it is submitted, because your name is on the byline.
The title your customers read and most of your competitors never appear in. Usually live inside three weeks.
A masthead with its own newsroom and its own readership, rather than one that reprints what it is sent.
One most of your industry would recognise without being told what it is. Longer to place, and worth more for the same reason.
Commissioned by an editor who could have said no. This is the genuinely hard one and we will say plainly when it is not realistic yet.
Not after. You get the title, the section and the angle in writing, and you decide whether it is worth the money before any of it is spent. We will not take a fee against a publication we have not already agreed with you.
If the piece cannot be placed where we said, you are not charged for it. The alternative is a fee for effort, which is how people end up paying for a link on a site they have never heard of.
Answer a few questions once, usually by email, about the argument you are qualified to make. We build the piece from that, from your filings, and from what is already published about you.
Then read it and say yes. One round of changes is normal, and nothing is submitted anywhere until you have approved it.
A release is something you send, and everybody who reprints it publishes the same words. Search engines and the AI assistants can both see that, and a hundred copies of one paragraph count for about as much as one.
An article is something a publication chose to run with your name on it. That is the thing that gets cited, and it is the only kind that counts toward the Wikipedia test.
Wire distribution counted as coverage. Paid links. A number of placements with no titles attached. Anything written to a word count rather than an argument.
We also check every figure against its original source before it goes in. On the last one, three statistics the client had been publishing for months did not survive that check, and they came out.
Somebody asks ChatGPT about you before the meeting. The answer comes from somewhere, and it is not your website unless your website is what got quoted. We ask all four assistants, in your name, and show you the answer and every source it leaned on to write it.
Three questions, put to ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and Claude with web search on: who you are, whether you are credible, and what you are associated with. Those are the three somebody actually types before a call.
Twelve answers a month, and we keep every one, so the change from one month to the next is something you can read rather than a feeling.
Whether each assistant named you at all. Every source it cited, listed by site. Which of those are yours, and which belong to somebody else who shares your name.
Then the part that matters: which sites the assistants keep going back to, so the work has somewhere to aim rather than being spread evenly over nothing.
Our own founder, because he is the one person we can name without asking first. All four assistants named him in all twelve answers, and three of the four cited his own pages while doing it, including the hosted page this list sells at £350.
Perplexity leaned on 22 different sites. Gemini cited one, and it was a Google redirect rather than a publication. Same person, same question, same day.
That is a strong record answering well, and it is a best case. A thin record reads nothing like it. The common result is an assistant naming somebody else who shares your name, or declining to say anything at all, which is its own finding and usually the more useful one.
We are not going to pretend your first reading will look like his. It is a measurement, and the point of a measurement is that it can come back badly.
£49 a month. Add it to anything else on this page or take it on its own, and stop it yourself whenever you like.
The first reading comes with the free audit, so you can see what they say today before deciding whether it is worth watching.
Nobody can make an assistant say a particular sentence, and anybody selling you that is selling something they do not have. What we can do is make sure there is something accurate and published for it to find, and then show you every month whether it found it.
Already have some of this? Take one piece, or three. We still do the work, it just is not a whole record, and there is no guarantee attached because the refund depends on the whole thing being finished and holding together.
At your own address. Yours, and it stays up.
The reference file Google and the AI assistants read from.
Written and placed under your name. Priced by the publication, see Founder profile.
Set up, and made to agree with everything else. Each.
Harder than it looks. Gets declined or published wrong when people try it alone.
A month. Add it to anything above, or stop it whenever.
No guarantee. The refund is on the managed route only, because it depends on the whole record being finished and holding together. One piece on its own cannot carry that promise, so we do not pretend it can.
All of it bought piece by piece comes to about £1,500. Managed is £1,500 and carries the guarantee. If you want everything, this is the expensive way round and we would rather say so than let you find out.
It opens on a published rule: three independent significant sources across six months, one of them national. Below that an article does not survive their editors, and a deleted one is worse than none. Paid editing is declared under the Wikimedia terms of use.
Google decides whether to make one and nobody controls that. Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling. We carry the risk instead, which is what the refund on the managed route is for.
Prices exclude VAT, which is added at checkout where it applies. Nothing renews on its own except the monthly, which you can stop yourself at any time from your own dashboard. Your page stays published either way.