Skip to main content
You’re no longer optimizing for one searcher. Three eras of search are running at the same time, and the newest two don’t send a single query, they fan a task out into many. Your job is to be the source a machine picks from a basket of reformulated queries. That shifts what content wins.

The three eras (Raymond’s diagram)

EraWho searchesWhat happens
Pasta humantypes a query into Google
Nowa human via ChatGPTChatGPT fires its own queries at Google
Nexta human via an AI agentthe agent fans out many queries to Google
“LLM turns a user query into fan-out queries which gets sent to search engines.”
In the “Past” world you optimized for the human’s exact phrasing and fought for position #1. In the “Now” and “Next” worlds an LLM sits in the middle. It reformulates the human’s intent into many queries, reads a handful of pages, and cites a few. Ranking #1 for the original phrasing is neither necessary nor sufficient, because what you actually want is to be citable across the whole fan-out. You don’t have to guess at that fan-out. You can watch the machine’s actual queries. Synscribe ships tools for exactly this: a Chrome extension that reveals ChatGPT’s web-search queries, and Birdseye (a macOS app) that shows Claude Code’s queries. It’s the same move you’d make as a human: step into the shoes of a serious customer researching the space, and ask how they would find your product.

What machines actually cite

The GEO content strategy comes straight from citation-type data (“What ChatGPT Gobbles Up”, promptwatch.com):
Content typeWhere it lands in citations
Listicles (“Top X”, “X Best”)the obvious top of the list
Landing pagesthe real winner, “taking both 2nd & 3rd position"
"How-to” articles”the next secret weapon”
Comparison / review pageswin “for B2B with long sales cycle and buying committees”
This hierarchy is why our content mix leans on landing pages (see 1.6) and starts BOFU-first (see 1.3): it maps to what the machines pull from. Real citations already work this way in the wild. best duty drawback pulls Zollback, hr intake automation pulls Jinba, how to set reminder linkedin dm pulls Kondo, and assent vs comply pro pulls Reglyr. Each one is a specific, high-intent query answered by a matched page.
❓ [needs Raymond: referral tracking]. PLAN 1.2 says “why we track ChatGPT/Perplexity/Claude/ Gemini referrals,” but the Workshop Notes cover seeing queries (extension/Birdseye), not the referral-tracking rationale. Confirm the tracking philosophy (likely lives in the PostHog/Onboarding SOP).

Operationalize it