Is GEO a legitimate strategy?
Yes, when GEO (generative engine optimization) means improving the accuracy and usefulness of public answers and checking what buyers actually see. The label alone does not validate a tactic. Our 22 September 2026 The AI written RFP study method (request for proposal) found total-cost criteria beyond the base subscription in 16 of 150 CRM (customer relationship management) answers. That gives a seller a specific information need to address, rather than a promise of better rankings.
Observed answers on stated dates, not a ranking.
Buyers also call this AEO (answer engine optimization) or AI search visibility.
What we measured
Measured. Study 7 extracted purchase criteria from retained answers and linked them to their source passages. In the CRM criterion records, the total-cost category concerns charges beyond the subscription headline. Sixteen is the number of included answers carrying that criterion, not the number of companies with a published price or the number of buyers who paid. Team review: in progress.
One Google AI Mode answer captured on 22 September 2026 includes this wording:
balancing scalability, integration complexity, user adoption, and total cost of ownership (TCO).
The study method separates stated criteria from vendor-page evidence. A buyer asking about total cost and a supplier publishing enough information to answer that question are distinct observations. The study did not test whether calling the work GEO increased sales.
Reported. Google’s AI-feature guidance, read on 30 October 2026, retains ordinary SEO (search engine optimization) requirements and does not prescribe special AI markup.
Reasoned. A legitimate project should name the buyer question, the public facts it will improve and the evidence used to check the result. A supplier’s preferred label cannot substitute for that scope. Require a defined deliverable before treating a strategy presentation as completed work.
What this means for you
The first ChatGPT answer to the CRM evaluation question makes the cost need concrete. Its retained passage asks for a three-year comparison covering implementation, integrations, storage, AI consumption, support, training and administration alongside licenses. It also asks about renewal increases, minimum commitments and exit terms. A page that supplies only a per-seat headline leaves much of that stated question unanswered.
Read the commercial unit. In the second repeat, the cost passage distinguishes the license charge from migration, add-ons and the ability to export usable data. A proposed GEO project could make those particular public conditions easier to find in a seller's pricing explanation, with a source for each stated charge. That is information work suggested by an actual answer passage, rather than evidence that the project has already improved its inclusion rate.
The third repeat separates total cost from another evaluation item: incremental AI charges and human approval. That gives the seller two different pieces of copy to substantiate. A subscription table could describe the base license while an AI-usage section explains the additional charging condition, rather than combining both into an unexplained single figure.
Also asked as
Will Generative Engine Optimization (GEO) be a thing?
Is generative engine optimization (GEO) or AI search optimization really a thing?
Generative Engine Optimization (GEO): Legit strategy or short-lived hack?
Related
- The measured buyer criteria
- How to buy GEO
- Google’s AI-feature requirements
- More geo basics answers
- Related buyer questions in the Index
Next step
Free 10-question check (one engine). No email is needed; runs are limited per network and per day, and by the site's daily allowance.
Our answer-study method, v1.1.
Answer Repair: Fix one answer, $490.
Prepared by the Broadcastwell team.
Page owner: Priya Nair, Management Consultant. Corrections: hello@broadcastwell.com