AI & Automation

Why AI Chatbots Ignore Your Content (And How I Fixed It for a Client)


Personas

SaaS & Startup

Time to ROI

Medium-term (3-6 months)

Last month, a client came to me frustrated. "ChatGPT never mentions our company when users ask about our industry," they said. "We have hundreds of blog posts, case studies, and resources, but it's like we don't exist in the AI world."

Sound familiar? You're not alone. While everyone's obsessing over traditional SEO, there's a new game in town: Generative Engine Optimization (GEO). And most businesses are losing without even knowing they're playing.

Through my work with an e-commerce client implementing AI-native content strategies, I discovered why LLMs overlook most business content—and more importantly, how to fix it. The problem isn't your content quality; it's how you structure information for AI consumption.

Here's what you'll learn from my real-world GEO implementation:

  • Why traditional SEO content fails with AI systems

  • The chunk-level optimization strategy that worked

  • How we restructured 20,000+ pages for LLM visibility

  • Specific techniques to make your content citation-worthy

  • Why breadth beats depth in the AI era

This isn't theory—it's a playbook from the trenches of implementing AI optimization strategies that actually move the needle.

Industry Reality

What the experts are getting wrong about LLM indexing

If you've been following the SEO community lately, you've probably heard the standard advice about GEO: "Focus on E-A-T," "Write longer content," "Add more schema markup." The problem? Most of this advice treats LLMs like fancy search engines.

Here's what the industry typically recommends:

  1. Write authoritative, long-form content - The assumption being that LLMs prefer comprehensive articles

  2. Optimize for featured snippets - Since that's what worked for Google

  3. Focus on brand mentions and citations - Believing that authority signals matter most

  4. Create FAQ sections - Thinking LLMs consume Q&A format better

  5. Build more backlinks - Assuming traditional ranking factors apply

This conventional wisdom exists because marketers are applying old SEO frameworks to new technology. It makes sense—we understand how Google works, so we assume ChatGPT and Claude work similarly.

But here's where it falls short: LLMs don't crawl and rank like search engines. They consume information during training, break it into chunks, and synthesize answers from multiple sources. They don't care about your domain authority or how many backlinks you have. They care about information density, context, and how well your content answers specific questions.

The biggest misconception? That you can optimize for LLMs the same way you optimize for Google. You can't. LLMs need content structured for chunk-level retrieval, not page-level ranking. Most businesses are optimizing for the wrong system entirely.

Who am I

Consider me as your business complice.

7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.

When I started working with this e-commerce client, they had a massive content problem. Despite having comprehensive SEO strategies and thousands of indexed pages, they were invisible in AI-generated responses. Users would ask ChatGPT about their industry, and competitors would get mentioned—but never them.

The client operated in a traditional e-commerce niche with over 3,000 products across 8 languages. They'd invested heavily in traditional SEO and had decent organic traffic. But when we tracked LLM mentions, we found something telling: they were getting mentioned a couple dozen times per month, despite being leaders in their space.

My first instinct was to apply traditional SEO thinking. I looked at their content through the lens of authority, backlinks, and featured snippets. Everything looked solid on paper. Their domain authority was strong, content was comprehensive, and they had industry recognition.

But after diving deeper into how LLMs actually process information, I realized we were solving the wrong problem. The issue wasn't content quality or authority—it was information architecture. Their content was structured for human readers and search engines, not for AI consumption.

Here's what I discovered: LLMs don't read your content the way humans do. They break information into passages, analyze context at the chunk level, and synthesize answers from multiple sources. Our client's content was optimized for page-level SEO, but LLMs needed chunk-level optimization.

This led to a fundamental realization: we needed to rebuild their content strategy from the ground up, focusing on how AI systems consume and process information rather than how search engines rank pages.

My experiments

Here's my playbook

What I ended up doing and the results.

Instead of tweaking existing content, I implemented a complete AI-native content strategy. This wasn't about adding a few tweaks—it was about restructuring how we created and organized information for AI consumption.

The Foundation: Chunk-Level Thinking

First, I restructured all content so each section could stand alone as a valuable snippet. Instead of writing long articles that built arguments progressively, we created self-contained chunks that could answer specific questions independently. Each section had clear context, relevant data, and actionable insights.

Answer Synthesis Readiness

I redesigned our content structure to make it easy for LLMs to extract and synthesize information. This meant:

  • Leading with direct answers before explaining context

  • Using consistent formatting for data points and statistics

  • Creating logical information hierarchies within each chunk

  • Adding clear attribution and source context

Citation-Worthiness Over Authority

Instead of focusing on domain authority, I concentrated on making our content citation-worthy. This meant ensuring factual accuracy, providing clear attribution, and structuring information so LLMs could easily reference it in responses.

Topical Breadth and Depth

Rather than creating a few comprehensive guides, we covered all facets of topics relevant to our industry. LLMs favor content that addresses multiple angles of a subject, so we created extensive topic coverage rather than just authoritative deep-dives.

Multi-Modal Integration

I integrated charts, tables, and visual data directly into our content structure. LLMs can reference structured data more easily than pure text, so we made our information more accessible through multiple formats.

The key insight: Traditional SEO optimizes for ranking; GEO optimizes for citation. We shifted from asking "How do we rank higher?" to "How do we become the source LLMs reference?"

Chunk Optimization

Each content section designed to stand alone as valuable, referenceable information

Citation Structure

Clear attribution and context to make content easily referenceable by AI systems

Topic Coverage

Comprehensive breadth across all industry facets rather than just deep authority pieces

Data Integration

Structured information through tables, charts, and multi-modal content formats

Within three months of implementing this AI-native content strategy, we started seeing significant changes in LLM visibility. The client went from occasional mentions to becoming a regular reference point for industry-related queries.

Most importantly, this wasn't just vanity metrics. We tracked actual business impact: users who discovered the client through AI-generated responses showed higher engagement rates and conversion potential than traditional organic traffic.

The approach proved that focusing on chunk-level optimization and citation-worthiness created more sustainable AI visibility than trying to game traditional ranking factors. Our content became genuinely useful to AI systems because it was structured for their consumption patterns.

An unexpected outcome: the content improvements also enhanced traditional SEO performance. By creating self-contained, valuable chunks, we improved user experience and reduced bounce rates across the board.

Learnings

What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.

Sharing so you don't make them.

Here are the key lessons from implementing GEO in a real business context:

  1. Chunk-level beats page-level - Structure content so each section provides standalone value

  2. Citation-worthiness trumps authority - Focus on being referenceable, not just authoritative

  3. Breadth beats depth - Cover all angles of topics rather than just creating comprehensive guides

  4. Context is crucial - Each content chunk needs clear context for AI understanding

  5. Structure matters more than style - How you organize information affects AI consumption

  6. Multi-modal content performs better - Integrate structured data, not just text

  7. Traditional SEO principles still apply - GEO enhances rather than replaces good SEO

What I'd do differently: Start with GEO principles from day one rather than retrofitting existing content. The architectural changes required significant effort that could have been avoided with AI-native thinking from the beginning.

This approach works best for businesses with substantial content needs and the resources to implement systematic changes. It's less effective for companies with limited content or those in highly regulated industries where information structure is constrained.

How you can adapt this to your Business

My playbook, condensed for your use case.

For your SaaS / Startup

For SaaS companies implementing GEO strategies:

  • Structure feature documentation as standalone, referenceable chunks

  • Create comprehensive use-case libraries covering all customer scenarios

  • Optimize integration guides for AI citation and reference

For your Ecommerce store

For e-commerce stores optimizing for LLM visibility:

  • Structure product information for AI consumption and comparison

  • Create comprehensive buying guides covering all customer questions

  • Optimize category pages as referenceable information sources

Get more playbooks like this one in my weekly newsletter