AI Visibility · Creator Agencies
When a buyer asks an AI engine which one to use, a handful of names come back. We measure whether yours is among them, then build the third-party presence that puts it there.
Creator Agencies specifically
The method below is the same whichever industry you are in. These are the parts that are not — and they are usually what decides whether the programme works.
Everything in this vertical points at recruitment. Twenty-four hundred monthly searches from creators looking for representation is the entire commercial opportunity, and it is a far clearer intent than anything on the fan side.
Creators research agencies in communities that are openly hostile to marketing, and the engines read those communities heavily. Presence has to be genuine participation; a burned account is worse than no presence at all.
This category has a reputation problem and creators know it. Verifiable review presence does more work here than copy does, and it is the most commonly ignored asset in the vertical.
The method
Every major assistant declines explicit content. None of them decline the commercial question underneath it — which processor handles high-risk billing, which age-verification vendor to shortlist, which brand makes the better product. Those answers are being generated today, for your category, with someone named in them. The refusal everyone notices has distracted the whole industry from the recommendation nobody is measuring.
Brands are around six times more likely to be cited through third-party sources than through their own site. In restricted categories the gap is wider still, because the engines lean harder on sources they consider independent when the subject is sensitive. Roundups, comparison pages, community discussion, review platforms and directory profiles decide this. A site redesign moves none of it.
ChatGPT resolves heavily through Bing and licensed publisher content. Gemini and AI Overviews weight what Google has indexed and what it trusts. Perplexity leans unusually hard on community discussion, which is why Reddit threads decide more of this category than anyone expects. Copilot draws on Bing plus editorial. A programme optimising one surface will report healthy numbers while three others quietly fail.
Engines have to be able to tell that your company is one company — the legal name, the trading name, the product name and the domain all resolving to a single node rather than four unrelated stubs. In this industry that is routinely broken, because operators use different names across directories, media and their own footer for perfectly sensible commercial reasons. It is unglamorous, and it is frequently the single change that moves a score.
Each month we re-run your prompt set across all four engines and report the score, the per-engine breakdown, your share of voice against named competitors, and the citation source behind every mention. The number moves and you can see what moved it. Where an engine declines a prompt entirely we report that separately, because a refused prompt is a different problem from one a competitor won.
Category specifics
The method does not change between industries. The questions buyers actually ask, the sources the engines trust, and the rules you have to advertise inside all do.
Prompts we run for this category
Rules this category advertises inside
Citation layer
Each engine resolves a local recommendation through a different set of sources. These are the ones that decide whether a creator agency gets named — and most of them are not your website.
Scope
Specifics rather than adjectives — and an equally specific list of what it does not cover, because unclear scope is the most common cause of a bad first quarter.
Included
Not included
What to expect, when
6 questions
They decline explicit content and they answer the commercial questions around it. Which payment processor, which age-verification vendor, which brand, which app — all of those return named recommendations today. The baseline measures which of your prompts return a list at all before it measures whether you are on it, and we report both numbers separately.
Entity and schema corrections can register within two to four weeks. Roundup placement and community presence compound over three to six months. We report monthly either way, so progress is visible before it is complete.
No, and treat anyone who does with suspicion. No platform publishes how it selects sources. We work from measured output and correlations documented across the field, we report honestly, and we re-baseline the source map quarterly because these systems change without notice.
Traditional SEO gets a page ranked. This gets a company named. The inputs barely overlap — most of the work sits in third-party sources, community and editorial rather than on your site.
We report it and explain what changed. These systems shift underneath everyone, and community content in particular gets weighted differently quarter to quarter. A report that only ever contains good news is not a report.
No. We do not produce, edit, generate, upload or distribute explicit material, and that exclusion is written into every contract. We work on positioning, acquisition, measurement and the third-party presence that drives it. This is a firm line, not a negotiating position.
Before any retainer, we run fifty prompts across four engines and show you exactly where you stand against the operators being named instead.
Request your audit