Generative engine optimization services: what is actually delivered

Broadcastwell sells this service, so this page is a description of our own offer rather than a survey of the market. It states the price, the monthly deliverables and the parts of the category we think are oversold. There are no case studies on this page, and nothing here is a promise about a future score. What is published instead is the measurement, including our own.

$4,500
a month, published, three month minimum
4
answer pages delivered a month
40
answers re-scored every quarter
663
citations in our own category measurement
01

What the service is

Generative engine optimization is work aimed at getting a company named inside the answer an AI engine generates, rather than ranked in a list of links underneath it.

The category has collected a lot of vocabulary in eighteen months. Underneath it, the work reduces to three levers and one instrument. The levers are material an engine can quote, presence in the third-party sources an engine cites, and entity data clean enough that an engine can tell your properties belong to one company. The instrument is a fixed question set re-scored on a fixed cadence, which is the only thing that tells you whether any of the three levers did anything.

Most of the disagreement in this category is about which lever matters. That question does not have one answer, because it depends on your category's citation landscape, which is measurable. That is why the measurement comes first, and why ours is free.

02

What is delivered, and how often

DeliverableWhat it is
Four answer pages a monthPages that answer a specific buyer question with a number attached, because that is the shape engines quote
One schema and entity passOrganization structured data and a sameAs array, so an engine can tell your properties belong to one company. Hygiene, not a growth lever
Third-party placementGetting you into the lists and buyer guides engines actually cite in your category, which is where most of the citation weight sits
Brand mentions, citations and sourcesThe leading indicators, reported every month: how often you were mentioned, what was cited, and which sources the engines are pulling from
Your ten questions re-scoredThe same ten questions, the same four engines, the same scoring rules, every quarter, reported whether the number moves or not

The four engines are ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews.

The re-score is the deliverable that constrains the others. Same ten questions, same four engines, same scoring rules, every quarter. If the named count does not move, the report says the named count did not move. That is an uncomfortable design choice for an agency and it is the reason the other deliverables have to be real.

The months in between are not silent. Brand mentions, citations and the sources the engines are pulling from are reported every month, because those are the signals that move first. The named count is held to a quarter because one run is not a trend, and a monthly headline score would mostly report the variance between runs.

Engagements are deliberately few. Done properly each one takes real analyst time every month, so we hold about six at a time and no more than two in build phase at once.

03

What it costs

StepPriceWhat you get
Instant checkFreeFive buyer questions, two engines, emailed in about ten minutes
Full auditFreeTen buyer questions, four engines, forty scored answers, two-page document
Monthly program$4,500 a monthThree month minimum, then month to month
Founding rate$3,000 a monthFirst three clients, in exchange for a named public case study and a review

Published rates as of August 2026. The same ladder appears on the pricing page.

90-day proof gate: if the ten questions we track have not moved by the first quarterly re-score, we do not invoice month four. You keep every run, every answer and every source we collected.

The rate is published for a straightforward reason: buyers ask AI engines what this costs, and an engine cannot cite a number that is not written down anywhere. Three months is the minimum because three months is one full quarter, and a quarter is the shortest period over which the four-engine re-score shows a trend rather than noise.

04

What GEO is not

It is not schema markup as a growth lever. Ahrefs tracked 1,885 pages that added JSON-LD, each matched against three control pages with similar citation levels that did not, over a 30 day window. The result was no meaningful movement: minus 4.6 percent on Google AI Overviews, and roughly plus 2 percent on Google's AI Mode and on ChatGPT, both too small to mean anything. State the limits with the finding, because they are real: every page in the sample already had 100 or more AI Overview citations, so the study cannot say what schema does for a page that is not cited at all; pages that add JSON-LD often change other things in the same week; all schema types were pooled; and Claude and Perplexity were not covered. Our reading is that schema is hygiene. We do the pass because being unreadable is a genuine failure mode, and we do not price it as the thing that moves the number.
It is not a ranking service. There is no position to hold in a generated answer. There is a named count out of a denominator, and the denominator is a question set someone chose. An agency reporting rank in this category is reporting a number that does not exist.
It is not a citation dashboard. Being cited is not the same as being recommended. In our own category measurement rampiq.agency was cited 25 times while Rampiq was named in zero of the 120 answers whose question named no agency. A dashboard that counts citations only can show a rising line while nothing reaches your pipeline.
It is not a guaranteed outcome. Nobody can guarantee a named count, because no engine publishes its selection logic and the same question re-asked can return a different set of firms. Our own five-run measurement of a single category question watched the leading firm's count go 4, 7, 11, 11 and 16 out of 200 answers inside three hours, with identical wording on four of the five runs.
05

Why the measurement comes first

The reason to measure before buying is that the measurement changes which lever is worth paying for.

Take our own category as the worked example. Five runs of one buyer question across four engines produced 200 answers and 663 citations spread over 223 domains, 129 of which appeared exactly once. Every single top-cited domain was an agency's own website. No analyst, no review platform, no trade body anywhere near the top. In a category shaped like that, third-party placement is close to worthless and owned pages are almost the whole lever.

A category with an established analyst layer or a dominant review platform inverts that conclusion completely. Same service, opposite plan. You cannot know which one you are in without running the measurement, which is why the audit is free and why we would rather you read it and walk away than buy a plan built for someone else's category.

The published statistics behind these figures, with per-stat DOIs, are on the statistics page. The wider method sits in The 2026 State of GEO.

06

Method and limits

What these numbers are. The 200-answer, 663-citation figures come from a single category question run five times across four engines on 26 and 27 July 2026. They describe one category over one window. They are not a claim about yours.
Not peer reviewed. Volume I, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21537014. Volume II, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21586091. Volume III, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21789120. Each carries its data and analysis code. None has been peer reviewed.
Where we sit. Broadcastwell ran the measurement and sells in this category, so it is excluded from every ranking on this site. Broadcastwell was named in 0 of the 200 answers and cited 0 times among the 663 citations.
The evidence here is measurement. There are no case studies, testimonials or outcome claims on this page. Our own monthly score is published at our visibility, including the months it was zero.
07

Questions

What are generative engine optimization services?

Work aimed at getting a company named inside the answers AI engines generate when buyers ask about a category. In practice that means three things: publishing material engines can quote, getting into the third-party sources engines cite, and keeping entity data clean enough that an engine can tell your properties belong to one company. The fourth part, and the one that makes it a service rather than a guess, is re-measuring a fixed question set every month.

What does Broadcastwell deliver each month, and each quarter?

Four answer pages a month, one schema and entity pass, placement in the third-party lists and buyer guides AI engines actually cite, and a monthly report on brand mentions, citations and the sources the engines are pulling from. Your ten questions are re-scored across ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity and Google AI Overviews every quarter.

How much do generative engine optimization services cost?

Broadcastwell publishes its rate. The instant check and the full audit are free. The monthly program is $4,500 a month with a three month minimum, then month to month. The first three clients get a $3,000 a month founding rate in exchange for a named public case study and a review.

Does schema markup improve AI citations?

The best available evidence says it is hygiene, not a growth lever. Ahrefs tracked 1,885 pages that added JSON-LD against three matched control pages each, over a 30 day window, and found no meaningful change: minus 4.6 percent on Google AI Overviews and roughly plus 2 percent on Google's AI Mode and ChatGPT. The study's own stated limits matter: every page already had 100 or more AI Overview citations, so it cannot say what schema does for a page that is not cited yet, pages that add schema often change other things at the same time, and it did not cover Claude or Perplexity. We still do a schema and entity pass, because being unreadable is a real failure mode. We do not sell it as the thing that moves the number.

Why measure before doing the work?

Because the measurement decides what the work should be. In our own category, all 663 citations across 200 answers resolved to a citation landscape where every top-cited domain was an agency's own website, with no analyst, review platform or trade body near the top. In a category shaped that way, third-party placement is nearly worthless and owned pages are the lever. A different category inverts that. Without the measurement you are buying a generic plan.

Can you guarantee we will be named?

No. No engine publishes its selection logic, and the same question re-asked inside a single afternoon can return a different set of firms. What we commit to is a fixed question set, a fixed method, monthly indicators, and a quarterly number reported whether it moved or not.

What happens if it does not work?

We track the same ten non-brand buyer questions for you from month one, and the first run sets your baseline. At day 90, on the first quarterly re-score, we run those same ten questions again across the same engines. If you have not won more of them than your baseline, on any engine, we do not invoice month four and you can end the engagement there. You keep the full dataset either way: every run, every answer, every citation and every source we collected. The first three months are the committed term and are not refunded. This is a promise about month four, not a money-back guarantee, and we would rather state it plainly than sound more generous than we are.

Measure your category before you buy a plan for it

Five buyer questions through two engines, results by email in about ten minutes. The ten-question, four-engine audit follows, also free, no call required.

Run your free instant check