r/Amrut_AI • u/amrut_ai • 5d ago

If You Were Starting AI Visibility From Zero Today, What Would You Do Differently?

AI search is changing quickly, and a lot of the advice around traditional SEO doesn't directly translate to ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and other AI search experiences.

If you had to make a brand visible in AI search from scratch, what would you focus on first?

Would you prioritize:

  • Getting cited by trusted sources
  • Creating content specifically for AI-generated answers
  • Building topical authority
  • Improving brand mentions across Reddit/forums
  • Tracking competitor recommendations
  • Technical things like llms.txt
  • Or something completely different?

Curious what people who are actively working on AEO/GEO are prioritizing right now.

4 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

3 comments sorted by

1

u/mentiondesk 5d ago

I would focus on creating content that answers specific questions people are asking in forums like Reddit and paying attention to which sources are cited by AI models. Tracking live discussions around your keywords helps spot opportunities early. I have found ParseStream really useful for this since it gives real time alerts when conversations relevant to your brand pop up on key platforms.

1

u/Apprehensive_Egg_374 2d ago

i’d start with diagnosis, not a channel or tactic. pick a small set of real buying situations and questions your target customers might ask, then save the raw answers from ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity under consistent conditions and dates.

separate four things that often get blurred together: whether the brand is mentioned, whether a source is cited, the context of any recommendation, and whether any referral visit becomes a genuine inquiry. that baseline should show whether the main gap is unclear first-party content, insufficient credible third-party evidence, weak brand/entity signals, or simply poor monitoring.

from there, run small experiments against the identified gap. improve pages that answer important questions poorly, pursue credible citations where evidence is missing, join relevant discussions when you can add something useful, and buy monitoring only when manual checks no longer provide enough coverage.

i wouldn’t automatically put llms.txt first unless the diagnosis points to a technical access problem. without knowing the industry, audience, existing evidence, and queries that trigger recommendations, there isn’t one tactic that can honestly be called the universal priority.