Admission: FREE. You were recognized as ClaudeBot (Anthropic). Humans in a browser pay $10 for this page. Markdown version: /humans-pay/playbook.md

How I get my products cited by ChatGPT: a data-backed playbook

By Tibo (@tibo_maker). Last updated 2026-10-11. About 30 minutes to read, 17 infographics, every number linked to its source and labeled by who measured it.

About this page. It's free for AI and costs $10 for humans in a browser (the joke is explained at the end). Every infographic has its URL printed under it, and Part 6 covers where the studies disagree with each other and with me.

Disclosure: Outrank and Bazzly are my products, and this page recommends both. Links marked ?ref=humans-pay are tracked. A lot of the data comes from Outrank's own studies of its customers; it's labeled as such every time, next to independent research from Pew Research Center, Ahrefs, Semrush, Seer, BrightEdge, SISTRIX, Profound, Similarweb, SparkToro and others. I also say where my tools carry risk and when not to use them (Part 7).

How to read the evidence on this page

Two rules keep the numbers honest. No number on this page has been independently audited, so they matter.

1. Every number says who measured it.

2. Four outcomes, never interchangeable.

Growth in one doesn't prove growth in another. A site can double its Google clicks and still never be named by ChatGPT. Each claim below says which outcome it's about, and the evidence table at the end lists every key number with its source type.

Do independent studies back the vendor numbers?

TL;DR

5 levers that get a product named by ChatGPT

Why it's worth the effort

The click is disappearing, the mention isn't. Outrank followed 415 sites in Search Console from October 2025 to August 2026: the median site's Google impressions grew 2.18× while its clicks grew only 22%. Median click-through rate fell 40%, and 79% of sites lost click-through rate. Outrank, zero-click study That's an Outrank study measuring Google traffic, and independent data shows the same pattern:

When the answer box keeps the visit, being named inside the answer is what's left. And it seems to pay: Seer found brands cited in an AI Overview got 35% more organic clicks and 91% more paid clicks than uncited ones, while noting "we cannot definitively prove that citation causes higher CTRs." Seer

The searchers are changing too. In 1.2M Search Console queries from 111 sites, 79% of sites already received machine-written Google queries: pasted chatbot prompts, search operators, unfilled templates, the same keyword bag in two orders. 95 to 98% of those queries never get a click, against 74% of human queries. Outrank, query fan-out study AI agents are already searching Google for your pages, on someone's behalf.

Google shows you twice as often. It sends you a fifth more clicks.

AI visitors are worth more. On Ahrefs' own site, AI search was 0.5% of traffic but drove 12.1% of signups, which Ahrefs puts at a 23x higher conversion rate than organic visitors (one site, preliminary). Ahrefs, Jun 16, 2025 Semrush modelled the average AI search visitor as 4.4x as valuable as an organic one (a model, not observed traffic). Semrush, Jun 9, 2025 As I put it once: "AI mentions are the most relevant traffic ever and you can not bid on it (lol), it's hard to get." Source

The audience is big and spreading out. AI platforms sent 1.13B referrals to the top 1,000 websites in June 2025, up 357% year on year, still far below Google Search's 191B. Similarweb Gen-AI platforms averaged 9.5B visits a month between June 2025 and May 2026, up 70%, with ChatGPT's share falling from about 76% to about 53% as Gemini (about 27 to 28%) and Claude (about 9%) grew. Similarweb, Jul 29, 2026 Google's AI Overviews passed 2B monthly users in July 2025. Alphabet Q2 2025 earnings call Optimizing for "ChatGPT" alone is already too narrow.

Half a percent of the traffic. 12% of the signups.

Part 1. How an AI assistant decides which products to name

The mechanics

Assistants that answer "what's the best X" mostly do three things:

  1. Search. OpenAI describes ChatGPT search as rewriting your prompt into one or more targeted queries for search providers, sometimes followed by more specific ones. OpenAI Help Center Google's AI Mode does the same "query fan-out", splitting a question into subtopics and issuing many searches at once. Google, May 2025 Perplexity, Copilot and Gemini search too. AI Overviews and AI Mode sit on Google's own index.
  2. Read what those searches return. Because the queries are rewritten sub-questions, the cited pages are often not the top 10 for your exact words: Ahrefs found only 12% of URLs cited by ChatGPT, Gemini and Copilot rank in Google's top 10 for the original prompt. Ahrefs, Aug 11, 2025 Seer Interactive found 87% of SearchGPT citations matched Bing's top 20 organic results, vs 56% for Google (small sample, about 100 questions). Seer, Feb 6, 2025
  3. Name what keeps coming up. A product that appears across several independent sources is a safe recommendation. A product that only praises itself on its own site isn't.

Outrank's page on this says it simply: "AI recommends the brands it keeps finding online." And: "AI trusts what you say about yourself only when other sites say it too. Your blog gives it the answer, other blogs give it the reason to pick you." Source

Google says the same about its own AI features: "The best practices for SEO remain relevant for AI features in Google Search (such as AI Overviews and AI Mode)", and "There are no additional requirements to appear in AI Overviews or AI Mode, nor other special optimizations necessary." Google Search Central, AI features and your website

My take since February: "the sites getting cited in AI responses didn't optimize for ChatGPT - they are just optimized well." Source

Two words that get mixed up. A citation is a link to your page in an AI answer. A mention is your brand named in the answer. They're related but measured differently. Outrank's study below counts citations. Ahrefs' 75,000-brand study counts mentions. You want both.

What Outrank's 200-site study found

We looked at 200 websites drawn at random from Outrank customers with Search Console connected and at least 500 impressions in the last 28 days (40 from each fifth of the traffic distribution; hosted subdomains excluded). So it's a sample of Outrank customers that already had some Google visibility, not of the whole web, and the backlinks counted are mostly links placed through Outrank's own exchange. For each site, we matched its AI citations, measured by Ahrefs across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Copilot, Grok, Google AI Overviews and AI Mode (53,068 citations, September 2026), with its Search Console data, Domain Rating and verified backlinks. Full study

The pattern is a chain, where each step predicts the next (rank correlations across 200 sites, not a controlled test):

AI cites the sites Google already shows

Which assistant cites most. Perplexity gave out 41.6% of the recorded citations, Copilot 19%, AI Mode 13%, Gemini 12%, AI Overviews 10% and ChatGPT 4.8%. That doesn't make ChatGPT irrelevant: it cites less per answer, but it still quoted 114 of the 200 sites, and it has the biggest audience. Grok returned no citations for any site in the sample. If you want to see your first AI citation, look at Perplexity and Copilot.

Perplexity cites the most. Volume multiplies everything.

The study lists its own reasons to discount it: established sites have more of everything; in the Outrank exchange, sites that publish more also receive more links (correlation 0.79), so the two effects are hard to separate; Ahrefs tracks a fixed set of prompts; and it's a single snapshot, so it can't say how fast citations follow authority.

Does independent research back the chain?

Mostly, with one real disagreement:

What independent research says

Mentions beat raw link counts. Ahrefs studied 75,000 brands across ChatGPT, AI Mode and AI Overviews. YouTube mentions had the strongest correlation across all three surfaces (about 0.737, almost identical for ChatGPT). For ChatGPT specifically: branded web mentions 0.664, branded anchors 0.511, branded search volume 0.352, Domain Rating 0.266, branded traffic 0.235. Raw backlink counts were described as very weak. Ahrefs also found almost no relationship between a site's page count and AI visibility, and that ChatGPT is less gated by traditional authority metrics than Google's AI surfaces. Ahrefs, Dec 12, 2025 Part 6 deals with where that disagrees with Outrank's numbers.

What I take from it: a link inside a real article on a site with readers is also a brand mention, and that's the part that matters. A link in a footer on a site nobody reads is neither.

"Best X" lists are the biggest source type for product questions. Ahrefs looked at 26,283 source URLs ChatGPT cited for 750 top-of-funnel prompts: "best X" blog lists were 43.8% of cited page types. 79.1% of those lists had been updated in 2025. In 67.6% of Google "best X software" results, there was a list where the author's own company ranked itself first. Ahrefs, Dec 4, 2025

ChatGPT names the brands the web keeps mentioning

Which domains get cited depends on the assistant. Profound analyzed 680M citations (August 2024 to June 2025): Wikipedia was ChatGPT's top cited domain (7.8% of its citations); Reddit was the top domain for Perplexity (6.6%) and Google AI Overviews (2.2%). Profound

Answers are unstable. SparkToro and Gumshoe had 600 volunteers run 12 prompts 2,961 times in ChatGPT, Claude and Google AI: the odds of getting the same brand list twice were under 1 in 100. As reported by Search Engine Land. Being named is a probability. The levers raise it.

Page details help, a little. The Princeton GEO paper (KDD 2024) found that adding quotations, statistics and cited sources made a source more visible inside generated answers, while keyword stuffing hurt. Gains were largest for sources that started lower, and top-ranked sources lost visibility with the same edits. Aggarwal et al., arXiv 2311.09735 It only helps pages that get retrieved in the first place.

Part 2. Measure before you touch anything

You can't improve a share of AI answers you've never looked at. This is the method I use, and what we built Outrank's AI Overview tracker around. Source

  1. Write the prompts your buyers actually type. 20 to 30 category questions, not your brand name. "Best AI job application tool", "Tally alternatives", "how do I get customers from Reddit", "best SEO tool for a Shopify store".
  2. Run them where your users are. ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Copilot, Google AI Overviews and AI Mode, in the countries your customers live in.
  3. Run each prompt 5 to 10 times. Lists rarely repeat (SparkToro: under 1 in 100), so a single run tells you little. Record how often you're named: "named in 3 of 10 runs" is a real metric; "yes/no" isn't.
  4. Log which pages get cited. Those are the listicles, threads and articles you need to be on.
  5. Compare your pages with the cited ones. The gap is usually one of three things: no page answering that question, not on the cited listicles, or nobody on Reddit has ever mentioned you.
  6. Track the leading indicator. Your share of answers is the outcome. Google impressions were the best predictor of AI citations in Outrank's study, so watch them weekly.
  7. Track what it brings. In analytics, segment referrals from chatgpt.com, perplexity.ai, gemini.google.com and copilot.microsoft.com, and add "how did you hear about us?" to signup. Many AI-influenced visitors arrive by typing your name.
  8. Re-run monthly. Tools like Ahrefs Brand Radar, Profound, Semrush or Outrank's tracker automate this; a spreadsheet works to start.

Make sure assistants can read you at all. Check robots.txt doesn't block the search crawlers assistants use (OAI-SearchBot and ChatGPT-User for ChatGPT, PerplexityBot, Bingbot, Googlebot). Given the Bing overlap Seer found, verify your site in Bing Webmaster Tools and submit your sitemap there too (IndexNow helps new pages get picked up). Serve your main content as HTML: Vercel found none of the major AI crawlers it measured rendered JavaScript. Vercel, Dec 17, 2024

Part 3. The 5 levers, in depth

Lever 1. Make your product super niche

An AI answer names a handful of products per question. If you're "a marketing tool", you're competing with every marketing tool for a few slots. If you're "the AI job-application tool", there's a shorter list and you can be on it.

Pages that do beat pages that explain

Example: AIApply, an AI job-application product in the crowded job-search space, and an Outrank customer since March 2024. Content used to happen "when we can". With 331 articles published and 287 verified backlinks, Google clicks for May to July 2026 were 270,592, up 44% on the same months of 2025, and Ahrefs counts 1,368 AI citations across 271 pages. Case study In CEO Aidan Cramer's words: "The biggest visible shift: our brand started getting picked up in AI answers." And: "Over time, it compounds: more pages indexed, more references, stronger domain signals, and more chances to be the source AI systems pull from." Source

Lever 2. Be the best in your category

No trick here, and I wish there were one.

The best example I've seen is Tally. They made their form builder (almost) 100% free. I think it's very smart, because it makes them the obvious choice for ChatGPT to recommend. Serious big buyers will still buy, occasional buyers won't, and those were churning anyway. (Not affiliated.) Source

In my experience, "best" to an assistant looks like:

Lever 3. Get into listicles

I asked AI how to get ChatGPT to mention my product more.

AI: get #1 into listicles. me: but how? AI: reach out to blog owners, ask them, pay them.

So I did. Results: 400+ owners reached, 3 replies, crazy rates, 1 listicle live. Those lists are saturated, and there is no easy way in. Source

I pitched 400+ listicles by hand. One said yes

Why they matter. Assistants run rewritten searches around "best X". Those results are dominated by "best X" articles (43.8% of cited page types in Ahrefs' study). A separate study of 1,056,727 citations across ChatGPT, Google AI Mode and Perplexity found listicles were the most cited content type (21.9%), and "40% of commercial queries cite listicles, nearly double other intents." Wix Studio AI Search Lab, Mar 23, 2026 So being on several of them matters more than anything on your own site.

By hand:

  1. Run your prompt set (Part 2) and collect every listicle the assistants cite.
  2. Prioritize the ones that also rank on Google and Bing for "best [category]".
  3. Offer the owner something real: a free account to review, a reader discount, original data they can cite.
  4. Expect most to ask for money and many to never answer. If you pay, ask for the placement to be disclosed to readers.

How I do it now. Outrank's Scale Backlinks plan ($899/month) includes "first place in listicle articles, with a screenshot and a description" on vetted blogs, with "your link is the only paid one in the article". Source To be clear about how it works: Outrank generates the article around your placement and publishes it on the host blog, and your #1 spot is paid. That's what makes it fast. It's also why it isn't a substitute for earning a genuine review somewhere.

Lever 4. Get links and mentions from sites people actually read

A few weeks ago many people on X called Outrank a link farm. Some of it was fair: to get backlinks from our exchange, you had to host other people's links on your own site, and SEOs don't trust that kind of loop. Source

So we spent 8 weeks building a marketplace that works differently. On the marketplace, you don't host anyone's links. Outrank generates a full article with your link in it and publishes it on a vetted site's own blog, and we pay that site in cash through Stripe. The hardest part was deciding who gets to sell: 1,625 sites signed up and only 138 made it in. A site needs DR 30+, 100+ clicks a month for at least 3 months, and Search Console connected so we can see its real Google traffic. Then it has to pass a content check, which 220 sites failed on their own. Since August: 222 placements, 159 live, 158 of those dofollow, median 2.1 days from order to published.

I care about "real" because ChatGPT and Perplexity cite the sites people actually read. Nobody reads a private blog network, so nobody cites one. My bet is that AI search ends up rewarding fewer links from sites with real readers.

1,625 sites applied to sell links. 138 got in

Know the trade-off. These are paid placements, and Outrank inserts them as normal editorial dofollow links ("we never add a nofollow attribute"). Source Google's spam policies list "Buying or selling links for ranking purposes" as link spam, and accept paid links when they're "qualified with a rel="nofollow" or rel="sponsored" attribute value". Google spam policies The bet is that placements on vetted sites with real traffic, inside relevant articles, behave like the earned links they resemble. If your brand can't accept any of that risk, use the content side and earned mentions only.

Does it move anything? Two Outrank data sets, both correlational, both measuring Google traffic. Neither measures AI citations directly; the link to AI rests on the independent finding that Google visibility goes with AI mentions (Part 1).

The more real links a site gets, the more it grows

What customers say, in their own words (self-reported quotes; the Scalelist and 24hourEDU numbers come from Outrank case studies using Ahrefs and Search Console):

Lever 5. Get on Reddit

Many people called Reddit dead because ChatGPT stopped citing it. I think that's wrong. Source

Promptwatch reported Reddit's share of ChatGPT search citations falling from 3.83% (July 18 to August 7, 2026) to 0.52% (August 14 to 17), and calls the size of the drop provisional. Semrush on Promptwatch's data Meanwhile Ahrefs looked at 145M US Google results: when the "discussions and forums" block shows up, Reddit is in it about 84% of the time. And the baselines don't agree: Ahrefs had Reddit at 16.7% of ChatGPT citations around the same time, and Semrush measured something else entirely, the share of ChatGPT responses citing Reddit, which it saw fall from close to 60% in early August 2025 to around 10% by mid-September 2025. Semrush Three trackers, three different numbers.

Reddit is dead in ChatGPT. Is it?

Why I keep investing in Reddit:

Reddit is miserable to market on. It takes months of being useful before anyone lets you mention what you built. So do the slow, useful part anyway: "warm up your account with karma. contribute genuinely. don't look at quantity, look at quality. one thoughtful thread beats ten promotional drops." Source

How Bazzly fits, plainly. Bazzly scans Reddit 24/7 for threads where your product fits, drafts replies, and helps you DM the people asking. It can post from your own account (via a Chrome extension) or from Bazzly's warmed-up high-karma accounts, and it sells "smart upvotes to push your reply above the rest". Source Bazzly crossed $10k MRR in September, and on October 6, 2026, ChatGPT named it the best Reddit tool when I asked (one answer on one day; answers vary a lot, see Part 1). Source Know the trade-off: Reddit's rules ask users to "Participate authentically in communities where you have a personal interest, and do not spam or engage in disruptive behaviors (including content manipulation)", and Reddiquette says not to "Create mass downvote or upvote campaigns". Reddit Rules, Reddiquette Reddit also prohibits vote manipulation, and replies posted from accounts that aren't yours don't tell readers who's behind them. The setup I'd defend in public is your own account, a genuinely useful reply, and boosts only on replies you'd stand behind. Someone asked whether paid upvotes produce "real trust or manufactured social proof". Source Fair question: a boost only gets a reply seen, and a useless reply gets buried or reported anyway.

What users say (self-reported; Bazzly doesn't track customers' signups or traffic, so these are their own numbers):

Beyond the 5: YouTube, Wikipedia, review sites

Part 4. Proof: what it looks like when it works

Seven sites, their own numbers

Outrank's published case studies use Search Console data, Ahrefs Domain Rating that Outrank doesn't control, named people with word-for-word quotes, and the bad months. All case studies

Each result below is tagged with the outcome it measures.

Real readers in, AI citations out

Named case studies are the good stories. The honest aggregate is below: most sites grew, one in four didn't.

Most sites grew. One in four didn't

Across niches with at least 25 sites, 70% to 88% of sites grew; SaaS and tech, the most crowded, sat at the bottom of that range (70%). Sites that auto-published grew more often (76.8%) than those that didn't (62.5%), though the groups started from different traffic levels. Source

As of September 2026, Outrank had generated 1,002,810 articles and verified 473.7k backlinks live; 4,689 sites have Search Console connected. Source

Part 5. The 90-day plan

From invisible to in the answer: a 90-day plan

Days 1 to 7: measure. Build the prompt set and run it several times per assistant (Part 2). Fix crawler access and Bing verification. Output: a gap list and a baseline ("named in X of N runs" per prompt).

Days 7 to 30: own what you control. Write your one-sentence niche (Lever 1). Publish an answer page for every prompt you lost, plus comparison and alternatives pages, and ship one free tool if your category has an obvious calculator or checker. Publish daily rather than "when we can". Leading indicator: Google impressions climbing.

Days 30 to 60: get talked about. Go after the listicles assistants cited for your prompts (Lever 3). Get contextual links and mentions on sites with real Google traffic (Lever 4). Start replying usefully in Reddit threads that rank for your category (Lever 5). Ask customers for reviews.

Days 60 to 90: compound. Re-run the prompt set and compare with day 1. Refresh pages that slipped (AI assistants cite fresher pages than Google's organic results, by 25.7% on average per Ahrefs). Put more into the specific lists, sites and threads that got you named. A realistic target: first citations in Perplexity and Copilot, and being named in some runs for a handful of prompts. Outrank's data suggests most Google gains arrive after month three, so judge the plan at 6 months, not 6 weeks.

Budget, roughly. Do-it-yourself: your time, plus whatever listicle owners ask. Outrank's base plan: $99/month for 30 articles a month and exchange backlinks. Vetted DR 30+ placements and #1 listicle spots: Outrank Scale Backlinks, $899/month. Reddit with Bazzly: $199/month. Prices checked October 11, 2026.

Part 6. Where the data disagrees (and where I might be wrong)

Part 7. Where Outrank and Bazzly fit, and where they don't

What you can do by hand, and what I automate

Levers 1 and 2 are on you. Nobody can sell you niche or best.

Levers 3 and 4 are what Outrank automates. The $99/month plan does keyword research, writes and publishes 30 articles a month to your CMS, and builds backlinks through the Outrank exchange. Scale Backlinks ($899/month) adds paid placements on vetted DR 30+ blogs with real traffic, including #1 spots on listicles.

Lever 5 is what Bazzly automates, for $199/month.

Why I think they're a good fit for levers 3 to 5:

When not to use them:

Alternatives: digital PR or an agency for listicles and press; doing outreach by hand with the steps in Lever 3; Ahrefs Brand Radar, Profound or Semrush to track AI visibility; Reddit by hand from your own account.

As I put it in August: "2016: build it and they will come. 2021: write content and they will come. 2026: be the answer ChatGPT gives, and they'll come." Source

Bonus: AI might start paying publishers

Google is piloting payments to websites whose content shows up in Gemini, AI Overviews and AI Mode, with monthly earnings shown in Search Console. Source Google confirmed it as an early-stage "AI contribution" pilot where pay depends on whether a site's content contributes meaningfully to an answer, not on clicks. Search Engine Land, 9to5Google, Sep 17, 2026 It's a test and payouts reportedly vary a lot, but if it scales, being the source an AI uses could pay directly, not only through clicks.

FAQ

How long until an AI assistant names my product? There's no good time-to-citation data yet; Outrank's study is a snapshot. Google visibility comes first, and in Outrank's data Google clicks were +7% in the first 28 days, +27% by days 57 to 84, and about 2.0× by month 7. Source Plan in months. Reddit takes months of being useful.

Which assistant should I care about most? The one your buyers use. Perplexity cites the most and shows results first; ChatGPT has the most users but cites less per answer. Measure all of them.

Do I need a high-DR site? In Outrank's sample, median AI citations were 3.5 under DR 10, 42 at DR 10 to 19, and 98 at DR 30 to 44, so the biggest jump is at the bottom. Source Ahrefs found ChatGPT less tied to authority than Google's AI surfaces, so mentions matter at every DR.

Is llms.txt or schema the answer? Not on its own. Google says its AI features rely on its core ranking systems. This page has an llms.txt for fun.

Can I pay for AI mentions? You can pay for listicle spots and placements that AI reads, with the trade-offs in Levers 3 and 4. You can't buy the mention itself, and nobody can guarantee it.

Evidence table

Every key number on this page, what it measures, and who measured it. None were independently audited.

Claim Number Outcome measured Who measured it Source
Clicks fall while impressions rise Impressions 2.18×, clicks 1.22×, CTR -40% (415 sites) Google traffic Outrank study link
People click less with an AI summary 8% vs 15% of visits; 1% click inside the summary Google traffic Independent (Pew) link
AI Overviews cut top-result CTR 58% lower average CTR for the top page Google traffic Independent (Ahrefs) link
Cited brands get more clicks +35% organic, +91% paid clicks Google traffic Independent (Seer) link
AI visitors convert better 0.5% of traffic, 12.1% of signups (one site) Conversions Independent (Ahrefs, own site) link
Google visibility predicts AI citations Rank correlation 0.80 (200 sites) AI citations Outrank study link
Google page 1 predicts LLM mentions Correlation ~0.65 (10k questions) AI mentions Independent (Seer) link
DR 30+ sites get far more citations 29× (median 100 vs 3.5) AI citations vs Authority Outrank study link
Mentions beat raw link counts 0.664 vs 0.218 (AI Overviews, 75k brands) AI mentions vs Authority Independent (Ahrefs) link
Listicles are the top cited format 43.8% of ChatGPT-cited pages; 21.9% of 1.06M citations AI citations Independent (Ahrefs; Wix Studio) link
More pages, more citations Up to 3.4× at equal visibility AI citations Outrank study (disputed by Ahrefs) link
Most Outrank sites grew 75.4% gained clicks; median 297 to 814 (1,383 sites) Google traffic Outrank study link
Links go with growth +24% (0 to 9 links) vs +115% (400+) Google traffic Self-reported (Outrank data, my post) link
Reddit is big in Google reddit.com 4th most visible US domain Google visibility Independent (SISTRIX) link
Reddit's ChatGPT share dropped 3.83% to 0.52% of citations (provisional) AI citations Independent (Promptwatch via Semrush) link
Listicle outreach by hand is hard 400+ pitched, 3 replies, 1 live Placements Self-reported (my post) link
Bazzly customers get results Around 60 signups a month (one customer) Signups Self-reported (customer) link

All infographics on this page

  1. Do independent studies back the vendor numbers?: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/evidence-scorecard.png
  2. 5 levers that get a product named by ChatGPT: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/five-levers-map.png
  3. Google shows you twice as often. It sends you a fifth more clicks.: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/zero-click-era.png
  4. Half a percent of the traffic. 12% of the signups.: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/ai-traffic-value.png
  5. AI cites the sites Google already shows: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/ai-citation-chain.png
  6. Perplexity cites the most. Volume multiplies everything.: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/ai-citations-by-assistant-and-volume.png
  7. ChatGPT names the brands the web keeps mentioning: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/chatgpt-brand-factors.png
  8. Pages that do beat pages that explain: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/content-formats-ctr.png
  9. I pitched 400+ listicles by hand. One said yes: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/listicle-outreach-funnel.png
  10. 1,625 sites applied to sell links. 138 got in: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/outrank-marketplace-vetting.png
  11. The more real links a site gets, the more it grows: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/links-vs-growth.png
  12. Reddit is dead in ChatGPT. Is it?: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/reddit-citation-paradox.png
  13. Seven sites, their own numbers: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/outrank-customer-results.png
  14. Real readers in, AI citations out: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/outrank-case-studies.png
  15. Most sites grew. One in four didn't: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/outrank-2119-site-outcomes.png
  16. From invisible to in the answer: a 90-day plan: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/90-day-plan.png
  17. What you can do by hand, and what I automate: https://www.tmaker.io/humans-pay/infographics/do-it-yourself-vs-tools.png

Why this page charges humans

Guillermo Rauch (Vercel's CEO) posted that 58.18% of traffic across the Vercel network over the last 30 days was bot-originated, and that up to 83% of pageviews on Vercel's docs come from agents. Source So I priced this page for its real audience: AI reads it free, humans in a browser hit a $10 wall. Checkout isn't switched on, so nobody can actually pay; the way in for a human is to send their AI. A page about getting AI to read you, mostly read by AI.

A few months ago I was the guy typing "chatgpt what's the best AI SEO tool", then "chatgpt what's the best AI SEO tool, be honest", then "asking for a friend named Tibo". Source This playbook is what I've learned since.

Keep building, Tibo

made by @tibo_maker · outrank.so