AnswerShare Proposal for Texas First Rentals
Part 7 of 7 of the Texas First Rentals proposal. Open the full proposal.
All parts:
- Part 1: Executive Summary
- Part 2: Presentation
- Part 3: Proposal
- Part 4: FAQ
- Part 5: AI Prompt Results
- Part 6: Technical
- Part 7: Evidence (this page)
Evidence
Evidence and method
The facts behind this proposal, with their sources, dates and limits. Version 1.0 (2026-10-04). Everything on this tab is read from the same stored record as the other tabs. Security controls are in the Technical tab (register 1.1 (2026-10-06)).
1. Evidence index
| ID | Claim | Source | Date | Limitation | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV-01 | Measured GEO median for Texas First Rentals: 49.5 across the five-engine panel. | Score receipt 1fdfb57b-8655-4ea7-a2ad-fa8f116e29cf for texasfirstrentals.com; the per-engine scores are in section 3 below. | October 6, 2026 | GEO is AnswerShare's internal readiness indicator for whether the machine layer is AI-optimized; we do not measure success or failure by it, and success is judged on the pilot scorecard outcomes. It is not traffic, rankings or revenue. | Measured |
| EV-02 | 15 saved answers from 3 buyer prompts across five engines, captured October 7, 2026; 6 of 15 carry provider-returned citation references. | AI Prompt Results tab (full answers) and the baseline table below (SHA-256 of each saved answer). | October 7, 2026 | Engines vary run to run, and some search the web while others answer from training. Where no citation references are retained, search use is not established. Counts elsewhere in this proposal come from this same record. | Retained |
| EV-03 | 24 distinct declared AI crawlers seen in the last 30 days. | AnswerShare crawl log (bot_crawl_daily_with_imputation) | October 7, 2026 | Self-declared User-Agents counted across AnswerShare's client network: 24 declared identities, not 24 verified providers, and not requests to this prospect. | Declared |
| EV-04 | We engineer for five nines (99.999%). Since 13 April 2026 on our Top10Lists.us platform, and since 10 September across 10 client properties on our minute-by-minute monitor, we recorded 99.999% uptime: 7 minutes 7 seconds of interruption to our AI files over 719,843 measured production minutes, while serving more than 24 million crawler requests. Our layer fails open. People and search crawlers such as Googlebot and Bingbot are passed straight through to your own website and never reach our AI service, so none of those interruptions made a client website unavailable. | AnswerShare uptime record 20261006T0629Z-uptime-line-option1/combined.json (SHA-256 43e49e18cb837577), which combines the minute-by-minute monitor of 10 client properties, the Top10Lists.us serving record from 13 April 2026 and its crawler-request count | October 6, 2026 | A dated record from AnswerShare's own monitoring across its client properties, not a service-level commitment for your site. | Measured |
| EV-05 | The AI-side briefing (llms-full.txt) for your site is built from the Site Record and is not final until you approve it, with a source and an as-of date for each fact taken from a page. | Working version of the briefing; its version is recorded in the pilot agreement and each fact is reviewed against your website in the parity report before cutover. | A fact the website does not carry (for example counts, entity wording, hours that differ between pages, safety or contract summaries) is added to your website with your approval or removed before the briefing is served. The one labelled exception is dated third-party review ratings (for example Google Business Profile), shown with platform, date and scope and removable on request. Entity wording that your counsel has not confirmed is a blocking dependency for go-live of the machine layer. Nothing is served on your hostname before cutover. | Pending approval | |
| EV-06 | “Wow… just WOW!” (Kurtis Barton, Executive Vice President, V Digital Services (now an AnswerShare reseller partner)). | Email from Kurtis Barton to Robert Maynard, 18 July 2026 (subject 'wow', body 'just wow...'), five days after the machine layer went live on 2026-07-13; on file. The longer sentence, “We are now prepared to implement for clients for where ‘search’ is heading next.”, is a separate unprompted statement by Kurtis Barton. It is not part of the email. | 2026-07-18 | A customer reaction and a reseller partner's statement. It does not isolate AnswerShare's effect from website changes, prompt differences or model variation, and it is not evidence of lift for an equipment-rental business. | Published |
| EV-07 | LAVIDGE results on the Presentation's receipts slide: a GEO score lift of +32 in 18 days, reaching 83 on June 1, 2026; a GEO composite of 91/100 on June 29, 2026; and the engine audit of June 17, 2026. | AnswerShare's stored measurements of lavidge.com: 83 on June 1, 2026 (receipt 5b892bef), 91 on June 29, 2026 (receipt 28f246e9), and the June 17, 2026 audit of three buyer-intent queries on five engines. LAVIDGE's Chief Innovation Officer approved the quote, the lift figure and the audit, as shown on the slide, in writing on June 26, 2026. | June 1 to June 29, 2026 | The starting score behind the +32 is the figure LAVIDGE approved; AnswerShare keeps no stored run for it. Results for one agency's website, not a forecast for yours. | Published |
2. Measurement method
Five engines (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, Claude, Grok) are asked the same buyer prompts. Each saved answer is stored verbatim with its engine, capture time, finish reason and any citation references the provider returned, and is hashed (SHA-256) in the baseline table below.
GEO is AnswerShare's internal readiness indicator for whether the machine layer is AI-optimized; we do not measure success or failure by it, and success is judged on the pilot scorecard outcomes. The GEO median is the median of the engines' scores. If the five engines disagree by more than the published spread, the one engine furthest from the median is left out and the median of the other four is reported; the FAQ states the rule.
Counts stated elsewhere in this proposal (which engines named the company, how many answers were positive) are computed from the saved answers listed here. Engines give different answers on different runs, so this tab, not any summary, is the record of the sampling.
Site-readiness grading, search-enabled buyer-answer testing, non-search model perception and verified crawler delivery are different measurements. This proposal reports the first two from the record above and reports crawler delivery only as declared requests.
Before a pilot starts, the baseline is frozen (prompts, engines, run identifiers, and the dated record of each engine's answer) so that later results are compared with the same questions and the same denominators. Website changes and machine-layer changes are recorded in one dated change log, and each result is placed against it.
Before any DNS change, entity records that conflict across your own site and public listings (names, locations, descriptions) are reconciled against the Site Record, so the machine layer does not publish a conflict.
3. Baseline and saved answers
Per-engine GEO scores. Outlier rule applied: Claude was left out and the median of the other four, 49.5, is the headline. Scores come from the score receipt; copy edits reuse a receipt for up to 30 days, while the saved answers below are re-run whenever the proposal is rebuilt, so the two carry their own capture dates.
| Engine | Today | Projected |
|---|---|---|
| Perplexity | 47 | 91 (target) |
| ChatGPT | 55 | 86 (target) |
| Gemini | 50 | 91 (target) |
| Claude | 31 | 88 (target) |
| Grok | 49 | 91 (target) |
Performance metrics, today and projected. Today is the current stored value. Projected is a target with its basis in the same row; where no basis exists the cell says it is measured in the pilot. A target is not a guarantee.
| Metric | Today | Projected | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| GEO readiness median (AnswerShare's internal indicator, not a success measure) | 49.5 | 91 (target) | Modeled implementation target, up to 91 — subject to approved evidence, successful deployment, crawler retrieval, and remeasurement. This is a methodology-based target, not a guaranteed result. A target, not a guarantee. |
| Saved answers that name the company | 13 of 15 | Measured in the pilot | No reference-based projection is stated; the same prompts are re-run against the frozen baseline. |
| Machine-layer availability | 99.999% recorded uptime, Top10Lists.us since 13 April, client properties since 10 September, to 6 October 2026 (Technical tab, Security and Operations, SO-04) | Measured in the pilot | Reported weekly and on request from the same monitoring; no target is promised. |
| Delivery to declared AI crawlers | Not measured before cutover | Measured in the pilot | Counted as declared requests from go-live; no projection is stated. |
15 saved answers, captured October 7, 2026. The SHA-256 is of the exact saved answer text shown in the AI Prompt Results tab.
| Prompt | Engine | Captured | Finish | Citations | Company | SHA-256 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category discovery | Perplexity | 2026-10-07T07:38:10.032Z | completed | 16 | named | 0d5a662c1f99d818b44fdccec1be64ba1ac098b17a57ec0356866f160c1df873 |
| Category discovery | ChatGPT | 2026-10-07T07:38:10.032Z | stop | 0 | not named | f10634e2c0793c4dc251c2ea73856dc0772bd4c2ecc3eb0840386ed62433b221 |
| Category discovery | Gemini | 2026-10-07T07:38:10.032Z | STOP | 0 | named | aad8e3f7af8d6440506aa43bd87a30e3861b26fd71bd55ecfddfb03021feb629 |
| Category discovery | Claude | 2026-10-07T07:38:10.032Z | end_turn | 0 | not named | 5bd054d47b5aae1c2eb752e524d7795c5d609d159ff207fbb07aed642abd2a10 |
| Category discovery | Grok | 2026-10-07T07:38:10.032Z | completed | 18 | named | 14739050f593bfad26e18d73e19409539f085f5db51f381e5cf171d9218f9865 |
| Competitive comparison | Perplexity | 2026-10-07T07:38:25.720Z | completed | 26 | named | e68b157c9ae5753bd7aba2bc58c64fed6147901a695062802749826f3d00d6cb |
| Competitive comparison | ChatGPT | 2026-10-07T07:38:25.720Z | stop | 0 | named | b658f67bab3ada8ec94a23be49b06818131300483569e26cb797fd3ba94dcf60 |
| Competitive comparison | Gemini | 2026-10-07T07:38:25.720Z | STOP | 0 | named | 2f16861c724d5c00df8e23463a217ac1740e3fcd36035b7c103f368fecf9b4c3 |
| Competitive comparison | Claude | 2026-10-07T07:38:25.720Z | end_turn | 0 | named | 804114f5299ec0c00c1021c755c0c8a4ecdb37ef09b5801e8fa4ef29d42025e3 |
| Competitive comparison | Grok | 2026-10-07T07:38:25.720Z | completed | 36 | named | 51d53f9456f20abf6458b24ef1a4a3b6e8f98dc1ee7d0c9c08e35d396f00b6ab |
| Brand evaluation | Perplexity | 2026-10-07T07:38:23.356Z | completed | 24 | named | c89066c2076c9cd2da40ac265dbcfa606a373a0e2e6d4e8048210cc0087396f5 |
| Brand evaluation | ChatGPT | 2026-10-07T07:38:23.356Z | stop | 0 | named | c22d40cdb7230216fbbb5896181b5a527bd0ed23ac8bf8f567804efec342f750 |
| Brand evaluation | Gemini | 2026-10-07T07:38:23.356Z | STOP | 0 | named | f3435c9266b65d69cef7ed1a21e25f691aee4ad22753ef5354235725e168c956 |
| Brand evaluation | Claude | 2026-10-07T07:38:23.356Z | end_turn | 0 | named | a0c5f1f0fe053c5e080fb77b9e20bdc0319d787316cf6cc9cd0bb73f7c1ee4d8 |
| Brand evaluation | Grok | 2026-10-07T07:38:23.356Z | completed | 26 | named | ac849c0edbde495f91ca4aa28f1a26b3eeed62b73382eafacef28d2eef55c9d9 |
4. Crawler roster and delivery
Every declared AI crawler is routed to the machine layer (24 distinct declared AI crawlers seen in the last 30 days, as of October 7, 2026).
Every declared search crawler, including Googlebot, Bingbot and others, receives the human website, because search engines require their crawlers to see what people see.
The roster of declared AI agents, with each operator's stated role, is the Crawler roles table in the Technical tab; the roster version is attached to the pilot agreement.
Declared is not verified: routing follows the declared User-Agent, so counts are reported as self-identified requests. Requests are not citations, and a citation is not a recommendation.
5. The Markdown study, its method and its raw data
What we asked: do frontier AI crawlers ask for Markdown? That matters because Cloudflare’s Markdown for Agents serves Markdown only when a request carries the header Accept: text/markdown. A crawler that never sends it never gets Markdown.
What we measured: 4,300,723 valid, deduplicated crawler requests, each with its raw Accept header recorded, across five live sites: AnswerShare, Top10Lists, V Digital Services, LAVIDGE and Aker Ink. The data was frozen on 17 August 2026. A separate controlled test of 20,000 requests showed the serving rule: an explicit text/markdown request got Markdown, and everything else got HTML.
What we found: GPTBot, ClaudeBot, OAI-SearchBot, PerplexityBot and Meta-ExternalAgent asked for Markdown 0 times in 1,277,965 requests. Of 48 crawler labels seen, six ever asked for it: ShapBot (100%), ExaSearchBot (99.02%), Claude-User (37.52%), Googlebot (4.84%) and two groups of unidentified bots.
Crawlers that asked for Markdown, and the share of their requests that did
| Crawler | Requests asking for Markdown |
|---|---|
| ShapBot | 100% |
| ExaSearchBot | 99.02% |
| Claude-User | 37.52% |
| Googlebot | 4.84% |
How a request was counted: as a Markdown request only when its Accept header names text/markdown with a positive weight. text/*, */* and a missing header do not count, and a missing header is recorded as missing, not as a no. Excluded: our own cache warmers and audit probes, Cloudflare summary rows with no raw header, duplicate log entries of one request, and anything outside the study window.
The raw data, so anyone can reproduce it: the row-level data is published on the study page as NDJSON and CSV files. They come with a manifest of the window, row counts, query definition and exclusions, SHA-256 checksums, the collector source code and the Markdown parser. The manifest is signed (Ed25519, key answershare-audit-v1).
The public key is at answershare.com/.well-known/jwks.json, and a standalone verifier is at answershare.com/receipts/verify-study-release.mjs. The Top10Lists part (1,716,846 rows) has its own manifest and row export. The public files carry no IP addresses, cookies, query strings or login data.
How to repeat it: check the checksums and the signature, run the published parser on each row’s Accept header, and count the Markdown requests per crawler. The totals should match the manifest. The study page also gives a worker-off, worker-on protocol for testing how serving affects AI search answers.
What it does not show: it measures what crawlers asked for at these five sites during the window. It does not measure citations or rankings. A zero holds for that window and those crawlers only.
6. Customer observations
“Wow… just WOW!” Kurtis Barton, Executive Vice President, V Digital Services (now an AnswerShare reseller partner).
Email from Kurtis Barton to Robert Maynard, 18 July 2026 (subject 'wow', body 'just wow...'), five days after the machine layer went live on 2026-07-13; on file.
The longer sentence, “We are now prepared to implement for clients for where ‘search’ is heading next.”, is a separate unprompted statement by Kurtis Barton. It is not part of the email.
“We are now prepared to implement for clients for where ‘search’ is heading next.”
These are unprompted comments from each company’s evaluation of AnswerShare on its own website, before it became an AnswerShare reseller partner. Andrea Aker, CEO, Aker Ink (now an AnswerShare reseller partner), and Stephen Heitz, Chief Innovation Officer, LAVIDGE (now an AnswerShare reseller partner), are quoted from their companies' published records (links on the Presentation tab); the dates of those records are shown with each record.
A customer reaction and a reseller partner's statement. It does not isolate AnswerShare's effect from website changes, prompt differences or model variation, and it is not evidence of lift for an equipment-rental business.
Dated company records
These records are from marketing agencies. They are dated observations of what happened to those firms, not a prediction of results for another business.
LAVIDGE · Published record
Published customer record · Original source. Reproduced from the saved public page, not a new measurement. Saved page SHA-256 d9754c8785e98c195a935167d7fdabdec221e0edf6cd819b4c9e3a1d848fe237.
LAVIDGE · Evidence pack v0.1
One prompt. Five engine observations.
The public signed summary records LAVIDGE across five engines for one Phoenix agency prompt. The results are shown in the matrix below.
Prompt “Recommend an ad agency in Phoenix” Artifact published 2026-08-17 14:17:54 UTC Observation date June 5, 2026 · 15 days after May 21 Evidence type Signed publisher summary
Timing provenance: Robert Maynard Jr. confirms the observation occurred 15 days after May 21, placing it on June 5, 2026. This date is supplied separately from the original signed receipt, which remains unchanged and does not record the observation date.
Published result matrix
The evidence supports this public statement.
These values come from the signed payload's results array.
Perplexity
#1 Ranked first
Grok
#2 Ranked second
Gemini
#3 Ranked third
Claude
#4 Ranked fourth
ChatGPT
Surfaced Named without a published rank Supported copy
In the published summary, LAVIDGE surfaced across all five tested engines; Perplexity ranked it #1 for “Recommend an ad agency in Phoenix.”
Artifact record
Signed by AnswerShare. Verifiable by anyone.
The JSON payload uses schema answershare.receipts.case-study@v1, signer key ID answershare-audit-v1, and an Ed25519 signature. The public key is served as JWKS; the standalone verifier uses Node's WebCrypto implementation.
Artifact lavidge.signed.json Signer AnswerShare · answershare-audit-v1 Public key /.well-known/jwks.json Verifier /receipts/verify.mjs Canonicalization Canonical JSON, keys sorted, compact serialization
Reproduce the signature check
One public command.
Download verify.mjs, then run:
node verify.mjs https://answershare.com/receipts/lavidge.signed.jsonKnown payload conflict
The legacy sentence overstates ChatGPT.
The signed payload's legacy transformation sentence says “#1 on ChatGPT across five AI engines.” Its own results array says Perplexity #1 and ChatGPT surfaced. This page does not repeat the legacy sentence; it uses the narrower matrix statement above.
The signature prevents editing that historic payload in place. A corrected successor artifact should preserve the old receipt, link the replacement, and explain the change.
See the evidence changelog
AI outcomes are probabilistic. Engines can diverge, rankings can move, and the same prompt can produce different answers across users, devices, caches, and retrieval windows.
Back to evidence index Read the protocol FAQ
---
Aker Ink · Published record
Published customer record · Original source. Reproduced from the saved public page, not a new measurement. Saved page SHA-256 6705f2b9b0039489e0a777a3d01f5b93e8e0e8481df3a49c56134f46418d8e24.
Aker Ink From neutral mention to unqualified recommendation.
Initial State The prior Gemini response was neutral and named Aker Ink alongside other agencies to evaluate. Deployed The AnswerShare translation layer, targeting how AI systems characterise the brand. After Deployment “Aker Ink is a highly reputable, award-winning boutique PR and integrated marketing agency based in Scottsdale, Arizona. Founded in 2007 by CEO Andrea Aker, the firm stands out for connecting traditional media relations directly to business outcomes, digital leads, and measurable growth rather than relying solely on vanity PR metrics.” — Gemini
Prompt: I am evaluating Aker Ink to be our PR firm. What do you think?
> “AnswerShare has cracked the code on one of the most complex parts of GEO: the technical infrastructure that helps AI platforms find, understand and trust a company’s information. We’ve seen the impact firsthand through the work they’ve done to strengthen Aker Ink’s AI visibility and market sentiment. Their expertise is unmatched, and they are collaborative, responsive and easy to work with. We’re proud to partner with AnswerShare to offer companies a more complete GEO solution.”
> Andrea Aker Aker Ink
Speed Proof
V Digital Services · Published record
Published customer record · Original source. Reproduced from the saved public page, not a new measurement. Saved page SHA-256 4b9db18fcab6b5eda8bf2588bfc23b98af41fbb97a55985eb302800d10f8a0ff.
Client case study · V Digital Services
Invisible to #1 — in 3 days.
Measured on the prompt “Recommend a good digital advertising agency in Phoenix” — audit dated 2026-07-16, three days after the machine layer went live at 2026-07-13 08:45 UTC. Perplexity #1, Grok #1, ChatGPT #2.
On 17 June 2026, five AI engines were asked which digital marketing agencies to consider for enterprise SEO. None of them named V Digital Services. The AnswerShare machine layer went live at the edge of www.vdigitalservices.com on 13 July. Three days later, the audit above returned V Digital Services first on Perplexity, first on Grok, and second on ChatGPT. On 2 August, Perplexity returned it first again. On 22 July, ChatGPT did not return it at all.
Every statement on this page carries its date and its source, the 22 July dip included. The full before-state, the exact queries behind each measurement, and the figures we withheld are all below.
2026-06-17 Pre-cutover Omitted by 5 of 5 engines on the enterprise-SEO query; 4 of 5 on the Phoenix query Archived receipts, read directly 2026-07-13 08:45 UTC First AI-crawler request recorded at the edge Crawl log, first row 2026-07-16 +3 days Perplexity #1 · Grok #1 · ChatGPT #2 Client dashboard engine audit The starting condition · 2026-06-17
Before AnswerShare, AI rarely named V Digital Services when buyers were choosing an agency.
On June 17, 2026, five AI engines were asked two buyer-intent questions about choosing a digital marketing agency. V Digital Services was omitted from nine of ten answers, including every answer to the enterprise-SEO question. That baseline established the starting point for the machine layer.
Query 1
“Which digital marketing agencies should I consider for enterprise SEO?”
| Engine | Model | Result | Competitors named | SHA-256 of answer text |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perplexity | sonar-pro | Omitted | Digital Authority Partners; AMP Agency; Clay Agency | 78c8e9e63e…f4f113 |
| ChatGPT | gpt-4.1 | Omitted | — | b39b18550e…1e3a52 |
| Gemini | gemini-2.5-pro | Omitted | — | 7b22e100f4…474ef2 |
| Claude | claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929 | Omitted | — | 9f5727a19d…5ca071 |
| Grok | grok-4 | Omitted | — | d5d0e91a84…9aa430 |
Query 1 baseline results by engine, captured 2026-06-17 Query 2
“What is the best digital marketing agency in Phoenix AZ for SEO and paid search?”
| Perplexity | sonar-pro | Named | — | 7e7a0a1625…73c8b0 |
| ChatGPT | gpt-4.1 | Omitted | — | 307411bf1e…004500 |
| Gemini | gemini-2.5-pro | Omitted | — | d2ca88973a…af8541 |
| Claude | claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929 | Omitted | — | 4b2938a9cf…549f0f |
| Grok | grok-4 | Omitted | — | ef39d78daf…141bd5 |
Query 2 baseline results by engine, captured 2026-06-17 Results, in order, with the dips
What we observed, on the day we observed it.
Rankings in generative engines move. A sequence that only moved upward would be a sequence that had been edited. This one includes the day ChatGPT dropped V Digital Services entirely.
| Date | Observation |
|---|---|
| 2026-07-15 | AnswerShare GEO composite reported as moving from 77 at cutover to 89. This is AnswerShare’s own composite metric, not an engine ranking. No engine placed anything on this date. |
| 2026-07-16 | Engine audit on the query “Recommend a good digital advertising agency in Phoenix”: Perplexity #1, Grok #1, ChatGPT #2. Gemini and Claude were not measured on this query. Three days after first recorded crawl. |
| 2026-07-19 | Perplexity, on the query “recommend a digital agency in Phoenix”, run in an incognito browser: V Digital Services cited. The observation was ours, not the client’s — “The citation is important. But look how its opinion of VDS has changed.” |
| 2026-07-22 | ChatGPT did not surface V Digital Services on two prompts that day. On a “best digital advertising agency in Phoenix” prompt: “You didn’t come up.” Later the same day, on a separate run: “It didn’t list you in the top5.” |
| 2026-07-28 | An internal email carrying the subject line “VDS from 82 to 90”. The figures appear only in the subject line — the message body does not restate or evidence them. Recorded here for completeness, not offered as a measurement. |
| 2026-08-02 | Perplexity: V Digital Services #1. The clearest dated first-place result in the record. |
Dated observation sequence, 2026-07-15 through 2026-08-02
The 2026-07-16 audit, cell by cell
| Engine | Position |
|---|---|
| Perplexity | #1 |
| Grok | #1 |
| ChatGPT | #2 |
| Gemini | —not measured on this query |
| Claude | —not measured on this query |
Query: “Recommend a good digital advertising agency in Phoenix”. “—” means the engine was not measured on this query — it does not mean a null result. Current instrumentation
The measurements, including the ones that are not where we want them.
Metric codes are reproduced as they appear on the client dashboard. Where the dashboard and the underlying store disagree, we say so and withhold the figure rather than choose between them.
Crawler traffic
Trailing 30 days as of 2026-08-08. This is a rolling window — it is not anchored to any capture date elsewhere on this page.
15,829 Cleaned AI-crawler requests trailing 30 days 5,116 User-intent 32% of cleaned volume 9,282 Training 1,431 Search
Grand total before cleaning: 16,820. Source: crawl log, client_slug vdigitalservices, queried 2026-08-08.
The GEO composite, as a series
AnswerShare’s own composite score — not an engine ranking, and not a third-party measurement. We present it as a dated series rather than a headline number because the stored values disagree with one another.
| Date | Value | Where it is stored | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-13 | 77 | Reported as the value “at cutover” | Email, Robert Maynard, 2026-07-15 |
| 2026-07-15 | 89 | Reported same morning | Email, Robert Maynard, 2026-07-15 |
| 2026-07-27 | 90 | quant_metrics + comparison_scores | Both tables agree on 90; they disagree on the underlying Grok and Gemini values (97 vs 100) |
| 2026-07-27 | 82 | quant_metrics, later row, same day | Unreconciled against the 90 recorded hours earlier |
| 2026-08-02 | 92 | quant_metrics, row id 128 | Most recent stored value. The client dashboard does not surface it — it still shows 90. |
GEO composite values by date and store
The five-model median underlying the 90 was captured 2026-07-27; that is the correct date for that score. A further update ran 2026-08-07, but 2026-07-27 remains the authoritative capture for the composite the dashboard displays.
In band
INFRA Infrastructure 100 SEN Sentiment +85 RR Retrieval reliability 0.991 RTC Retrieval time cost 0.008 TTFB Time to first byte 16 ms TTLB Time to last byte 17 ms SCHEMA Schema depth 2
Out of band, or withheld
SGR target ≥ 0.25 0.211 LMR target ≤ 30 days 53 days SEO soft — below the range we consider settled 57 EGR soft — below the range we consider settled 33% CITE withheld The dashboard reads 55%; the underlying store reads 60. Not published until the two are reconciled. RPC dropped The dashboard displays 6,176. No corresponding field exists in the measurement store, so we cannot say what it counts. Removed rather than reprinted. 2026-08-08 / Client dashboard refreshed 2026-08-08; underlying values read from the measurement store the same day. In the client’s words
> “Working with the AnswerShare team has fundamentally changed how we think about AI visibility. At V Digital Services, we’ve always focused on helping clients win in search, and we have been very successful at doing it. But it’s a new world. With AnswerShare as a partner, we are now prepared to implement for clients for where “search” is heading next. I have seen, firsthand, the value that perspective brings.”
> Kurtis Barton Senior VP of Strategy & Sales, Voice Media Group
Approved for publication by Kurtis Barton, 2026-07-23.
> “just wow...”
> Unprompted, on seeing a result. Email, 2026-07-18 21:41 UTC, subject line “wow”. This is the whole message — it is a reaction, not a testimonial, and it is not part of the quote above.
> “And the hits just keep on coming!”
> Jayson Akers Director of SEO/AEO/GEO, V Digital
> Email, 2026-07-19 15:40 UTC.
What this page does not claim
The limits are part of the result.
This section is not a disclaimer. It is the part of the record that tells you how much weight the rest of it will carry.
No one can guarantee a specific answer to a specific prompt
Not us, not any vendor. What is engineered is retrieval, grounding and trust architecture — the conditions under which a model can find, parse and rely on a source. That raises the probability of a citation. It does not determine any individual generation.
Results vary by user, device, cache and RAG timing
On 2026-07-27 Kurtis Barton ran a prompt from a colleague's computer and got a different answer than he got from his own, and asked why. The honest answer is that the model frequently is not reading the live site — retrieval-augmented generation has its own refresh cadence, and even an explicit instruction to visit the page is not always honoured. Two people running the same prompt on the same day can legitimately see different results.
Email exchange, 2026-07-27
The headline compresses a sequence — it is not a controlled experiment
“Invisible to #1 in 3 days” is the observed order of events: omitted by five of five engines on the enterprise-SEO query at the 2026-06-17 baseline, then first on Perplexity and Grok at the 2026-07-16 audit, three days after go-live. The baseline asked two specific queries; the audit asked a third. A controlled re-run of the baseline queries has not been performed, which is why this page quotes no lift figure and no percentage anywhere.
Our own delivered artifacts are not evidence that the layer works
The machine-readable files now published on the client's domain — llms.txt, llms-full.txt, the MCP manifest, the entity record — are our work product. They belong in the description of what was shipped. They are not third-party validation and are not cited as such here. Every result on this page comes from an engine, a crawl log, or a probe.
Rankings move, and this one moved down
Six days after the audit that placed V Digital Services #1 on Perplexity and Grok and #2 on ChatGPT, ChatGPT returned it on neither of two prompts. That is on the sequence above with its date. A case study that showed only the upward days would be describing a different system than the one that exists.
2026-07-22
Four measurements are out of band right now
SGR is 0.211 against a target of 0.25 or better. LMR is 53 days against a target of 30 or fewer. SEO sits at 57 and EGR at 33% — both softer than we consider settled. These are published beside the strong numbers because a panel with no weak readings is not a measurement panel.
Dashboard, 2026-08-08
Two figures are withheld outright
CITE reads 55% on the dashboard and 60 in the underlying store; we will not pick one. RPC displays 6,176 with no corresponding field in the store at all, so we cannot say what it counts. Both are named here rather than quietly dropped.
Reconciliation, 2026-08-08 Methodology and receipts
How to check any of this.
The baseline probe and its receipts exist as files — 30 of them across 10 screenshots, 10 raw API responses and 10 text transcripts, each raw response carrying a recorded SHA-256. The crawl log, the composite series and the instrumentation panel are read from the measurement store and dated at the point of reading.
Our measurement rules, and what we do when a number cannot be substantiated, are written down.
FAQ
Other customer statements on the Presentation tab are quoted as their speakers published them. They are agency and client observations, not matched or causal measurements, and they are not evidence of results for an equipment-rental business.
7. Security acceptance summary
Each control, its status and the test that must pass. The full statements, owners, evidence and limits are in the Technical tab.
| Control | Area | Status | Acceptance |
|---|---|---|---|
| SO-01 | Routing and exposure | Implemented today | Synthetic routing matrix passes before cutover: browser, Googlebot, Bingbot, every roster agent, and mixed or ambiguous User-Agent strings, with response captures kept. |
| SO-02 | Routing and exposure | Implemented today | Roster version and routing test results attached before cutover; any later roster change is logged with its date. |
| SO-03 | Routing and exposure | Implemented today | Response captures for each route class (public page, form, API, asset, administrative path) reviewed by your security owner before cutover. |
| SO-04 | Availability and recovery | Implemented today | Fault-injection results (backend timeout, router error, edge failure) produced and reviewed before cutover. |
| SO-05 | Availability and recovery | Test before cutover | Rehearsal completed and the recorded prior value verified by your DNS administrator before cutover. |
| SO-06 | Availability and recovery | Proposed default | Thresholds and the acknowledgment times (five minutes to acknowledge, ten to start a rollback during the staffed window) accepted by your owner before cutover. |
| SO-07 | Availability and recovery | Pilot deliverable | Both periods completed without a threshold breach before the 90-day evaluation clock starts. |
| SO-08 | Update integrity | Implemented today | Invalid-signature, wrong-tenant and missing-secret tests pass before the webhook is enabled. |
| SO-09 | Update integrity | Implemented; hardening planned | Tests pass before activation: missing timestamp, duplicate event, reordered event, replay of a retired page, cross-tenant event. |
| SO-10 | Update integrity | Implemented today | Redirect, private-address, port and response-size negative tests pass before the webhook is enabled. |
| SO-11 | Update integrity | Implemented today | Review-hold behaviour demonstrated on a sample change before cutover. |
| SO-12 | Update integrity | Implemented today | Redacted sample reviewed by your security owner before cutover. |
| SO-13 | Content parity and freshness | Pilot deliverable | Retirement and purge confirmed within five minutes of an accepted notification in the test, before the corresponding feature is enabled. |
| SO-14 | Content parity and freshness | Test before cutover | Initial cohort passes before cutover and again after every change to it. |
| SO-15 | Data, access and ownership | Proposed default | Data table, subprocessor list and the signed retention schedule approved by your security owner before cutover. |
| SO-16 | Data, access and ownership | Test before cutover | Security-owner sign-off on the evidence set before cutover. |
| SO-17 | Data, access and ownership | Pilot deliverable | Alert exercise and runbook walk-through completed before cutover. |
| SO-18 | Data, access and ownership | Your decision | Exit terms accepted in the pilot agreement before start. |
8. Pilot scorecard (proposed; frozen before cutover)
| Stage | Measure | Threshold |
|---|---|---|
| Gate 1, before any DNS change | Security-owner sign-off on the Technical tab evidence set (SO-01 to SO-18) and the signed retention schedule | All pre-cutover acceptance tests passed and recorded |
| SEO production-release gate | The complete SO-14 SEO release evidence set, including the exact hostname, per-URL parity, search-crawler access, cache retirement and rollback rehearsal | All tests passed and evidence retained before production routing or crawler-facing publication. The Proposal's active-serving freshness rule applies; seven days is not an allowance to serve a known material contradiction. |
| Gate 2, before the evaluation clock starts | Test-environment soak, staffed cutover with heightened monitoring, then a seven-day production soak | 48 hours of synthetic traffic and 72 hours of heightened monitoring without a stop-threshold breach, then seven production days of crawler delivery, parity and change-notification checks with no stop-threshold breach |
| Evaluation, 90 consecutive days from accepted go-live | Delivery of the approved public facts to declared AI crawlers, URL-level parity, matched-prompt answer presence against the frozen baseline, with factual accuracy, citations and best-fit recommendations reported alongside presence | Reported as observed, with variability, per engine and dated |
| Continuation decision | Crawler delivery, URL-level parity and matched-prompt answer presence against the frozen baseline, with business results reported separately | At least 95% of requests from declared AI crawlers receive the approved facts, measured weekly and on request. No known material contradiction between the website and the machine layer stays actively served while awaiting correction: on a detected material change, deletion, noindex instruction, sensitive correction or loss of freshness assurance, the affected machine representation is disabled and the current origin response is served until a corrected representation passes review. Administrative closure may take up to 7 days only while the superseded representation remains disabled. By day 90, Texas First Rentals appears in at least as many answers to the frozen buyer prompts as in the baseline. |
9. Change log
Evidence model 1.0 (2026-10-04); security register 1.1 (2026-10-06). Corrections to claims on other tabs are recorded here with their date when a proposal is revised.
October 2026
Implementation Overview and Partnership Proposal
Investment structured around proof, not promises.
The program is structured around proof, not promises — implemented to establish the AI visibility foundation, then measured against agreed success criteria.
| Engagement Phase | Investment |
|---|---|
| Implementation | $2,500 · Paid at contract execution |
| Maintenance | $2,500/month |
| TOTAL | $2,500 + $2,500/mo |
Required Software Agreement: AnswerShare EULA is required for the GSE AI Visibility Foundation portion of the engagement and is to be executed alongside the AnswerShare payment process.
What the Monthly Retainer Covers
- Continuous GSE deployment, hosting, and edge delivery of the machine-layer response.
- Ongoing content synchronization: as source-of-truth content changes, the GSE is updated automatically.
- AI Impressions and AI Engagements measurement — crawler telemetry, prompt panels, and signed receipts updated on a 30-day rolling window.
- GEO Score and AI Sentiment tracking across all five scored engines.
- Access to the client portal for reviewing scores, receipts, and crawl data.
Client Responsibilities
- DNS access to add or modify the CNAME record that routes AI-agent traffic through the AnswerShare edge layer.
- Approval of the initial factual inventory before the GSE goes live.
- Timely review of the content-state dashboard; AnswerShare surfaces updates, but publication decisions remain with the client.
- Webhook integration (optional but recommended) to signal page-level changes for revalidation.
How Success Is Defined and Measured
- Deployment — Routing is live and rollback-verified: AI and bot traffic reaches the GSE at the edge; human visitors reach the production site unchanged.
- Retrieval — Eligible crawlers demonstrably receive the approved representation, confirmed by signed crawler logs from the 7-day soak window.
- Answer performance — Presence, citations, factual accuracy, sentiment, and recommendations improve across the fixed prompt panel, measured on 7- and 30-day rolling windows against the pre-deployment baseline.
- Commercial impact — Where client analytics permit measurement: qualified referral traffic, leads, pipeline, or revenue improves after deployment.
Billing & Terms
- Invoicing — Upon proposal and EULA execution. Ongoing at the first of each month.
- Payment Terms — Due upon contract & EULA execution.
- Minimum Commitment — 3 months (90 Days) from the date the agreement is executed.
- Continuation — Month-to-month after minimum term. When you want to stop, you tell us and we agree the timing together, so your site never loses service.
- Program Start — Available within 1 business day of signed agreement.
Evidence record
Close ×
Is This Cloaking?
Close ×
ETHICS & TRANSPARENCY
Q. Is this cloaking?
A. DIFFERENT FORMATTING IS NOT, BY ITSELF, DECEPTIVE CLOAKING.Google's own definition of cloaking:
> “Cloaking refers to the practice of presenting different content to users and search engines with the intent to manipulate search rankings and mislead users.”
> — Google Search Central
Googlebot and Bingbot receive the human site. AI crawlers receive a machine layer derived from the same facts, restated for AI readers.
Same text as in the Presentation tab, section "Is This Cloaking?": https://proposals.answershare.com/efa83680e8538e264aa420f1d791d6cf/presentation
SOURCE: Spam Policies for Google Web Searchdevelopers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#cloaking
AnswerShare
Next: Part 1 of 7 — Executive Summary https://proposals.answershare.com/efa83680e8538e264aa420f1d791d6cf/executive-summary
End of the Evidence tab of the Texas First Rentals proposal (9 sections).