Your buyers ask AI who to pick. Make sure it’s you.
Gets you selected acrossChatGPTClaudeGeminiPerplexity
RocMode shows you whether AI picks you or your rival, finds the work that changes it, builds that work, and sends it to you to approve. Then it proves what moved.
We ask ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Perplexity the questions your buyers ask, and show where they pick you and who they pick instead. Free, no login. What’s the Score? Or sign up free and try everything for 14 days.
RocMode · Live read · Monday by Nine (example)
Asking ChatGPTBefore
The AI marketing and sales platform
Marketing and sales, rebuilt for the age of AI.
Your website in. A whole marketing and sales team’s work out. RocMode learns your brand from your site, then does the work: strategy, website, ads, social, PR, partners, email, design, and the deck that wins the deal. You approve every piece.
Other tools do one job. This does all of them, as one story.
Other AI guesses. This works from your facts and proof.
Other tools stop at the post. This follows it to the signed deal, and learns what won.
How it works
KnowWhere you really standActWhat to fix firstCreateWe build the work. You approve itProveDid it move?
Know · Step 1 of 10
It gets you. It gets your customers. It connects the dots.
Everything about your brand, your buyers and your rivals, sorted and connected.
Then it works out what to say, where, when and why. It’s the brain behind every step.
Builds: Customers · Offerings · Rivals · Proof
RocMode · BrandGraph · sample data
Following one momentCISO · Comparing · “Who’s the best managed security provider for a hospital group?”Moment found
Brand core3 found
Voice3 found
Visual identity3 found
Products and services3 found
Pricing3 found
Personas and markets3 found
Pains, gains, jobs3 found
Journeys and objections3 found
Proof and trust3 found
Content3 found
Competitors and partners3 found
Team2 found
Halvard Security35 facts
Two hospital case studies/partners
FactClaimProofAI-suggestedExample: Halvard Security, an invented managed security provider.
Reading halvardsecurity.com.au, socials, reviews and listings…
Halvard SecurityBrandGraph
12areas, all connected
3personas
15moments
6rivals
Sample data
Your customers
Customers
›
Personas
›
Journeys
›
Pains, jobs, objections
›
Moments
What you sell
Products and services
›
Offerings
›
Value proposition
›
Differentiation
Your rivals
Competitors
›
Industry
›
Expectations
›
Gaps to exploit
Moments + offerings
Opportunities
›
Campaigns
›
Ads
›
Sales
Content gaps
›
Content
›
Website
So it knows
What to say.Where. When. Why.
Moment foundCISO · Comparing · “Who’s the best managed security provider for a hospital group?”
Know · Step 2 of 10
Your strategy, from everything it knows.
Positioning built from your offerings and the gaps your rivals leave.
Claims you can’t back get cut before anyone sees them.
Seen isn’t selected. AI picks the brands it can tell apart.
Every era of marketing had its visibility number, and AI mentions are just the newest. Most AI tools still sell you visibility. But being mentioned isn’t being chosen, and for the first time you can measure the pick itself.
BroadcastAwareness
Media buyingReach
SearchRankings
SocialFollowers
AIMentions
What countsSelected
What AI made cheap
Making things.
Posts, pages, ads and reports in minutes
Anyone with a login can do it
Your competitors have the same tools
Sell on volume and you compete on price.
What AI made measurable
Being chosen.
Brand ABrand BYouBrand CBrand D
Buyers ask AI who to pick, and it names a few brands
You can ask the same questions and see who’s named
So you can see, moment by moment, where you win and lose
Compete on this and you compete on results.
See it on your brand
See how often AI picks you. Free.
We ask the AI assistants your buyers use the questions they really ask, many times each, at every step of their journey. Then we show where you’re picked, where you’re passed over, and who wins instead.
Your free Selectability Score asks the AI assistants the questions your buyers ask, without your name in them. You see who gets picked, at which moment, and the three gaps to fix first.
PR and reviews put someone else's voice behind your claims, at the moment a buyer stops taking your word for it.
Every other build is Kestrel talking about Kestrel. At some point in every purchase, that stops being enough. The COO wants to talk to a plant like theirs. The investor wants another portfolio company to vouch. The assistant, asked "is Kestrel Advisory any good?", goes looking for what others have written. This build is the Earned category's second build, beside Being named: the outside voices a buyer trusts more than yours, earned rather than bought.
It has three parts, and most firms run only one of them:
Press and research: the trade titles and reports that frame the category's problems, and name the firms worth knowing.
References: clients who'll take a call from a buyer like them, on request, quickly.
Reviews: what clients write on the platforms buyers and assistants check.
The Earned category's three nods live here, each as a short section: analyst relations (rarely relevant to a firm of Kestrel's size, and said so), awards (worth entering only when the judges and the buyers overlap) and word of mouth (which this build can't buy, but can make easy).
In RocMode: reviews in the Earned studio. Sample data.
The footprint, and what it reads from the chain
PR and reviews lead 4 cells and 7 moments, all at the checking step, where buyers go looking for someone other than Kestrel:
Moment
Who
Their question
Checking, by sector (4)
COO
"Can I talk to a plant like ours that's done this?"
Checking
Improvement lead
"Have they worked alongside an in-house team before?"
Checking
Investor
"Will other portfolio companies vouch for them?"
Checking
AI assistant
"Is Kestrel Advisory any good? Reviews and results?"
But its reach is far wider than its lead. It supports 15 more cells, the widest support of any build except the website: the triggers for the COO, owner, finance director and investor (where the benchmark's press coverage frames the problem), the owner's and investor's options, comparing for the COO, owner, investor and assistant, the finance director's numbers at the board, the owner's and finance director's checking, and the owner's and investor's follow-on. In almost every one, the job is the same: Believed, from a voice that isn't Kestrel's.
What it reads, and never rewrites:
From
It takes
Credentials
Every claim, and which ones outside voices could confirm
Content
The benchmark report, the only piece built to be quoted by others
Being named
The sources assistants cite, which decide where reviews and coverage matter
Email and Automation
The 90-day check, where a confirmed result becomes a reference or a review
The pitch
Which references each deal needs, by sector and role
Its slice of the Score, and its own audit
This build's part of the Selectability Score is Believed: the share of what's said about Kestrel that's accurate, and backed by someone other than Kestrel. It leads seven moments and touches Believed in 15 more cells.
Kestrel today, the 7 moments PR and reviews lead
Answered
Believed
Preferred
Bought
Moment score
COO · checking, by sector (inside deals)
60
65
55
50
58
Improvement lead · checking
30
30
35
40
33
Investor · checking
20
30
30
35
28
Assistant · "Is Kestrel Advisory any good?"
10
20
15
15
2
The COO's checking scores well because Kestrel's references, when they're found, are good. Everything else is thin. The assistant moment is the clearest: asked about Kestrel by name, assistants mix it up with a mining-services firm, find no reviews, and cite an old directory listing.
The audit.
Outside voice
What Kestrel has
What it misses
Press and research
No coverage in two years; one award (regional, 2023)
The trade titles that frame flat output and rising costs, which assistants cite
References
Four clients willing to take a call; none in food and drink or plastics; found by asking around, in two to three weeks
A reference per sector, ready within a week; an in-house improvement lead; an investor
Reviews
None on the review platforms assistants cite
Reviews from finance directors and plant managers, after confirmed results
Directories and lists
One old listing, mixed up with a mining firm
Correct entries in the four sector associations
Word of mouth
22 of 31 fit calls came by referral
Nothing that makes referring easy, or thanks anyone for it
That last row is the one to hold on to. Word of mouth is already Kestrel's biggest channel. It works despite the firm, not because of it.
Step 1: the shape, press, references, reviews
The shape is the outside voices the category is judged by: who buyers ask, and who assistants read. It's knowable. Being named's first scan already counted the sources assistants cite for Kestrel's questions; add the people buyers ask in person.
Voice
Who it speaks to
In Kestrel's category
Canon?
Trade press
COOs, finance directors, assistants
Three manufacturing titles cited in a tenth of answers
Yes
Research reports
Finance directors, assistants, the press
Industry and productivity reports; competitors' studies
Yes
References
Every chooser at checking
Expected by every buyer; offered by every competitor
Yes
Review platforms
Assistants, owners, finance directors
Two B2B review platforms cited in the scan
Yes
Association member lists
Assistants, procurement
The four sector associations
Yes
Analyst firms (nod)
Large buyers' procurement teams
Rarely, for firms of Kestrel's size
No
Awards (nod)
Owners
Two industry awards whose judges are plant and operations leaders
Optional
Peers and advisers (word of mouth, nod)
Owners, investors
Industry groups, accountants, operating partners
The biggest, and not earned by asking
Analyst relations, as a nod. For a 60-person firm selling to mid-sized plants, analysts don't shape the shortlist. Revisit only if large manufacturers' procurement teams start asking for analyst coverage.
Awards, as a nod. Enter only awards whose judges are the people Kestrel sells to, and only with a confirmed result. A business award judged by bankers moves no moment; an operations award judged by plant leaders can move an owner's checking.
Step 2: coverage, one story or review per judgement that lacks outside support
The coverage unit is a judgement a buyer makes that needs someone else's voice: not "get more press", but "the finance director needs someone other than Kestrel to say the savings were real". For each of the 22 cells this build leads or supports, write down the judgement, whose voice would settle it, and where the buyer or the assistant would find it.
Judgement
Moments
The voice that settles it
Where it's found
"Is this problem worth fixing, and is the capacity really in the line?"
Options and comparing: owner, investor, COO, assistant (12)
Comparison articles; association lists; peers
Lists; assistants; industry groups
"Have they done it in a plant like mine?"
COO checking by sector (4)
A client in the same sector
A reference call
"Will they work with my team, not replace it?"
Improvement lead checking (1)
Another improvement lead
A reference call
"Will other portfolio companies vouch?"
Investor checking and follow-on (2)
An operating partner or portfolio COO
A reference call
"Are they any good?"
Assistant checking (1); owner checking (1)
Reviews; correct facts; peers
Review platforms; directories; people they trust
"Were the savings real?"
Finance director checking and building the case (8)
Another finance director
A review; a confirmed case
"Would I tell another owner?"
Owner follow-on (1)
The owner, to a peer
Word of mouth
That's eight judgements across 52 moments. Each one names a voice, which tells you whether the job is press, a reference or a review.
Step 3: gaps, biases and jobs
Moment
Stage
Bias
The job
Triggers, all four choosers
Known
Familiar feels safe
Place the benchmark's findings in the three trade titles assistants cite, with Kestrel's people quoted by name
COO · checking, by sector
Believed
We follow others
One reference per sector, briefed and ready within a week; recruit food and drink and plastics first
Improvement lead · checking
Believed
Losses loom larger
An improvement lead who kept the methods, willing to take calls (Brennock's)
Investor · checking
Believed
We follow others
An operating partner or portfolio COO as a reference
Assistant · "any good?"
Believed
Familiar feels safe
Reviews from finance directors and plant managers on the two platforms assistants cite; the mix-up corrected
Finance director · checking
Believed
Losses loom larger
Reviews and cases where the client's finance director says, in their own words, how the savings were counted
Owner · checking
Believed
We follow others
An owner reference; an operations award judged by plant leaders
Owner · follow-on
Preferred
We follow others
Make referring easy: a paragraph the owner can forward, and a thank-you that isn't a payment
Two rules come out of the jobs. Ask only after a confirmed result: a reference or review before the 90-day check is a favour; after it, it's evidence. And never write the outside voice yourself: an edited quote, a drafted review or a paid list place is Kestrel talking in a disguise, and assistants, editors and buyers are all getting better at noticing.
Step 4: reconcile, the outside-voice plan
Programme
What it produces
Judgements it settles
Signals
Priority
References
One briefed client per sector, plus an improvement lead, an owner and an investor; ready within a week
Plant like mine; my team; portfolio; owner's trust
Canon, coverage, strategy
P1
Reviews
Reviews from finance directors and plant managers on the two cited platforms, asked for after a confirmed result
Any good?; savings real?
Coverage, strategy
P1
Facts corrected
The mining mix-up fixed; four association entries correct (shared with Being named)
Any good?; worth a look?
Coverage
P1
The benchmark in the press
Findings placed in the three cited trade titles, once a year, with follow-up articles by Kestrel's people
Worth fixing?; worth a look?
Canon, coverage, strategy
P2
Comparison lists
A fact sheet and a sector case sent to the editors of the cited lists
Worth a look?
Canon, coverage
P2
Word of mouth
A forwardable paragraph after every confirmed result; a thank-you note from the managing partner
Would I tell another owner?
Coverage
P2
Awards
One operations award a year, entered with a confirmed case
Owner's trust
Coverage
P3
Seven programmes. Every judgement has one. The references and reviews come first because they're cheap, quick and decided by Kestrel's own clients. The press comes second because it depends on the benchmark, which comes once a year.
Rejected, with reasons:
A press release for every win. No judgement asks for it, and trade editors stop opening them.
Paid placements in "best of" lists. That's advertising; if Kestrel runs it, it's labelled as such in the Advertising playbook.
Incentives for reviews. It breaks the platforms' rules and the claims rule, and a review a buyer suspects is worse than none.
A referral fee. Owners refer because they were helped. Paying turns a favour into a sales job, and changes how the next owner hears it.
The anatomy library
Asset
Parts, in order
Length
The story pitch (to an editor)
The finding, in one sentence, with its number · Why their readers care now · The method, in two lines · Who can be quoted, and their plant experience · What's attached
Under 150 words
The reference brief (to the client giving the reference)
Who'll call, their plant, their question · What they're likely to worry about · What you're happy to say, and what you'd rather not · How long it will take
Half a page
The reference card (to the buyer)
The client: plant, size, sector, problem · What changed, confirmed by whom · Their role, and what they can speak to · How to book the call
A third of a page
The review request
Thanks, for a specific result · The ask: one platform, one link · What helps other buyers (what you were worried about, what happened) · An easy no
Under 120 words
The correction request
What's wrong, in one line · What's right, with a link to proof · The exact text to replace it
Under 100 words
The forwardable paragraph (word of mouth)
Who Kestrel is, in the entity line · What it did for them, in their figures · How to get in touch
60 words
Four rules hold for every outside voice:
Their words, never yours. Brief a reference on what the buyer will ask; never on what to say.
After the result, not before. No reference or review before savings are confirmed.
Matched to the reader. A finance director's reference for a finance director; a plant manager's for a plant manager.
Easy to say no to. A client who says yes reluctantly gives a reluctant reference.
Briefs
Two levels: the programme brief (once, for each of the seven programmes) and the asset brief (for each pitch, reference or request).
PROGRAMME References
JUDGEMENTS Plant like mine (by sector); my team; portfolio; owner's trust
MOMENTS COO · checking (4); improvement lead · checking; investor ·
checking;
owner · checking
THE BENCH Packaging: Brennock (plant manager; improvement lead)
Food and drink: Calloway (finance director)
Metal and engineering: a fabricator's managing director
(owner)
Plastics: none yet; Hartwell after its 90-day check
Investor: none yet
READY WITHIN One week of a request
ASKED After the 90-day check, by the lead engineer who did the work
LIMIT No client takes more than four calls a year
OWNER Managing partner
MEASURE Days from request to call; deals that move after the call
ASSET Reference brief: Brennock's improvement lead, for Hartwell's
THE CALLER Sam Ito, improvement lead, Hartwell Plastics (260 staff)
THEIR QUESTION "Will they work with us, or replace us?"
LIKELY WORRY That the review will be read by the COO as a verdict on Sam's
team
THE REFERENCE Brennock's improvement lead, who led the changes and ran the
next
review without Kestrel
AVOID Asking them to say anything about price or the other bidders
TIME 20 minutes
The finished example: the benchmark pitch, a reference card and a review request, written in full
Three assets, one from each of the main programmes. Kestrel, its clients, its people and the editor are invented.
1. The story pitch, to the editor of a manufacturing title assistants cite.
Subject: Mid-sized plants are losing 4% to 9% of margin to capacity they already own
Hi Rachel,
Our 2025 benchmark of 38 plant reviews in mid-sized manufacturers found the same thing again and again: output was flat not because lines were too small, but because changeovers, small stops and scheduling were eating the capacity. In the median plant, that cost between 4% and 9% of annual contribution margin. Six of the 38 had already approved a new line when the review started.
Your readers are deciding capital budgets for next year now, and this is the finding most likely to change one.
The method: every figure comes from measurements taken on the floor during a review, and the method note says which savings each client's finance team has confirmed since. The full report and the data by sector are attached.
Our head of delivery, Mark Ellison, ran 14 of the reviews and spent 20 years running plants before that. He's happy to talk this week.
Jo Brady, Kestrel Advisory
2. The reference card, sent to Hartwell's improvement lead.
Your reference: the improvement lead at Brennock Packaging (240 staff, packaging)
What changed: warm-up and changeover losses cut on the carton line; output from 41 to 47 cartons a minute; confirmed by Brennock's finance director. Brennock's improvement team led the changes, and ran the next review, on a third line, without Kestrel. What they can speak to: what it was like to have outside engineers on the floor; how the findings were credited; what their team kept. Booking: a 20-minute call this week. Reply with two times and we'll confirm.
3. The review request, to Calloway Foods' finance director, after the 90-day check confirmed the savings.
Subject: Thank you, and one small favour
Michael, thank you for confirming the savings on the filling line. Scrap from 4.1% to 2.6% is a result your team made stick, and it's good to have it in your own figures.
If you'd be willing, a short review on [platform] would help other finance directors in your position. What helps most is what you were worried about before the review, and what you found afterwards. The link is below; it takes a few minutes.
And if you'd rather not, that's completely fine: the result speaks for itself.
Priya Raman
What to notice. The pitch leads with a number and a reason to run it now, and offers the method before the editor asks. The reference card tells the buyer exactly what the reference can speak to, so the call is about their question, not a general endorsement. The review request asks after the result, suggests what's useful without suggesting what to say, and makes saying no easy. Three assets; Kestrel needs about 40 of them a year.
Templates
The reference bench (one row per client willing to take calls)
Client
Sector, size
Person and role
Problem solved
Confirmed result
Can speak to
Calls this year (max 4)
Last called
The review tracker (one row per confirmed result)
Client
Person
Confirmed result and date
Asked on
Platform
Reviewed?
Thanked?
The press log (one row per pitch)
Title
Editor
Cited by assistants?
The finding pitched
Sent
Response
Published
Moments it should move
The reference brief
CALLER [name, role, plant, size]
THEIR QUESTION [in their words]
LIKELY WORRY [what they'll really want to know]
THE REFERENCE [who, and what they can speak to]
AVOID [what the reference shouldn't be asked to cover]
TIME [minutes]
In the campaign plan
Most campaigns make a claim; this build supplies the outside voice that makes it believable. The rule: no campaign makes a claim without naming the outside voice that backs it.
Kestrel campaign
The claim
The outside voice
The annual benchmark
"Mid-sized plants lose 4% to 9% of margin to capacity they own"
Coverage in the three cited trade titles; a quote from a client finance director
"Before you buy another line"
"Find out what this line can do first"
A reference who didn't buy the line (Brennock); a review saying the same
Board season
"The numbers will stand up"
A finance director's review; a finance director reference
Owners' round table
"Owners like you chose Kestrel"
The speaker is the outside voice; the write-up in the association newsletter
Investor 100 days
"We start inside 100 days"
An operating partner reference, once there is one. Until then, the claim isn't made
The last row matters. A campaign can wait for its outside voice. It can't make one up.
Running it
Who owns what. At Kestrel, the managing partner owns the reference bench, because references are relationships, not marketing. The marketing lead owns the press log and the review tracker. Every request to a client comes from the person who did the work.
When
What happens
After every 90-day check that says "yes"
Thank the client; ask whether they'd be a reference, and separately whether they'd write a review
When a deal reaches checking
A reference card to the buyer within two days; the call within a week
After every reference call
Thank the reference; note what was asked, so the next brief is better
Monthly
The review tracker and the facts: any new review, any wrong fact in the scan, any listing out of date
Quarterly
The bench: gaps by sector and role; no client over four calls a year
Yearly
The benchmark to the press; one award entry, if a judged one fits
Word of mouth, as a nod. It can't be run, but it can be made easy and noticed. After every confirmed result, send the client the forwardable paragraph. When a new enquiry names who referred them, the managing partner thanks that person in writing the same week. Kestrel's 22 referrals last year went unthanked.
Common mistakes
The mistake
The stage it breaks
The bias it ignores
At Kestrel
Instead
Press releases about the firm
Known
Familiar feels safe
News of a new hire, sent to nobody in particular
Pitch findings the editor's readers need
References "on request"
Believed
We follow others
Two to three weeks to find one; deals cooled
A bench, by sector and role, ready within a week
The same reference for everyone
Believed
We follow others
A COO's reference offered to a finance director
Match the reference to the reader's role and question
Asking before the result
Believed
Losses loom larger
A review request in the final report
After the 90-day check, and only after a yes
Writing the outside voice
Believed
We follow others
Drafting quotes for clients to approve
Their words, unedited; brief them on the question, not the answer
Wearing out the bench
Believed
Losses loom larger
One loyal client taking every call
No more than four calls a year each
Paying for places or reviews
Believed
We follow others
A paid spot in a "best of" list, presented as editorial
Earn the place; if it's paid, it's labelled as an ad
Leaving wrong facts in place
Believed
Familiar feels safe
The mining mix-up, repeated by assistants for a year
Correct the sources, not just the site
Judging by mentions
All, unseen
Good enough beats best
"Featured in three titles" with no moment moved
Judge by the judgement each voice was meant to settle
The bias to watch in the team: reticence about asking. Most professional firms feel that asking a client for a reference or a review imposes on them. A client whose savings are confirmed usually wants to help; not asking leaves the next buyer to take Kestrel's word for it.
The business check and the measures
Revenue: references and reviews sit closest to signed work; the press supports the earliest moments. Start with the bench.
One truth: every result a reference or review mentions is a signed claim. If a client says something Kestrel can't sign, it isn't quoted.
The proof is real: no outside voice before a confirmed result. Two of last year's nine reviews have one; the 90-day check is what changes that.
Capacity: a reference call costs a client 20 minutes. Four calls a year each means the bench must grow with the deals.
Measure
What it tells you
Stage
Days from reference request to call
Whether checking stalls (today: two to three weeks)
Believed
Deals that move forward within a week of a reference call
Whether the reference answered the buyer's question
Believed
Reviews on the cited platforms, and their share from finance directors and plant managers
Whether the assistant's "any good?" has an answer
Believed
Assistant answers to "Is Kestrel Advisory any good?" with the right facts
Whether the mix-up is fixed (shared with Being named)
Believed
Coverage in the cited trade titles, and answers that quote it
Whether the benchmark is travelling
Known
Referrals thanked within a week
Whether word of mouth is noticed
Preferred
The Loop for this build
Each quarter the Loop (step 11) reads the bench, the reviews and the press log beside the Score's Believed, and asks: for each judgement a buyer makes, is there now a voice other than Kestrel's to settle it?
What the Loop finds
What it means
What changes
Believed rises at checking, but not at comparing
References work inside deals; nothing outside them
Reviews and comparison lists, so the voice reaches buyers before they call
Reviews appear, the assistant still says "no reviews found"
The platforms aren't the ones assistants cite
Check the scan's citations; move effort to the cited platform
Coverage published, framing answers unchanged
The coverage isn't in a source assistants read, or doesn't carry the finding
Pitch the cited titles; lead with the number
Reference calls held, deals still stall
The wrong reference, or the wrong question
Match by role; brief on the buyer's real worry
A sector with no reference
A gap the next win must fill
Ask the next client in that sector, after their 90-day check
What Kestrel's first year would look for. References within a week by the end of the first quarter, with a plastics reference once Hartwell's savings are confirmed. Reviews from finance directors on both cited platforms by mid-year, and the assistant's answer to "is Kestrel any good?" naming the right firm, with a review. Then the benchmark's coverage, which moves the slowest and the furthest: the moment a trade title quotes Kestrel's 4% to 9%, every assistant answer that cites it carries Kestrel's name into a trigger moment Kestrel has never reached.
Shapes by business type
Business type
Typical mode
The outside voices that usually carry the most weight
B2B professional services
Committee or owner-led
References by sector and role, trade press, peer referrals, a few reviews
B2B software
Committee
Software review platforms, analyst coverage for larger deals, customer case studies, community answers
Product reviews and ratings, creators' reviews, "best of" lists
Local services
Owner-led or considered personal
Map reviews, neighbours' recommendations, local community groups
Marketplaces
Varies on each side
Reviews on both sides, press about trust and safety, sellers' stories
Feeling a bit overwhelmed?
You should be, a little. One firm: eight judgements across 52 moments, seven programmes, a reference bench by sector and role that can answer within a week, reviews asked for only after confirmed results, a benchmark placed in the titles assistants read, and wrong facts chased down wherever they've spread. Most firms send a press release when they hire someone and call it PR.
RocMode does part of the heavy lifting:
Where the outside voices count. Its scan records which sources the assistants cite when your buyers ask, so you know which titles, lists and platforms matter in your category.
What's being said about you. Across five AI assistants, it records whether you're named and who's named instead, moment by moment.
