These are the rules we write the site by. They are also the rules we hold our client work to, so you can judge one by the other.
Where do our claims come from?
From the platforms themselves. When a post says what Google does with a file, a setting or a report, the source is Google Search Central or Google's help pages. For Bing and Copilot it is Microsoft's own documentation. For ChatGPT and Perplexity it is OpenAI's and Perplexity's crawler and help pages. For domains it is ICANN.
We keep a working library of those official documents and check each claim against the current version before we publish it. Search products change often. A claim that was true in the spring can be wrong by the fall, so we would rather link the page than repeat what someone else said about it.
We do not use other agencies' blog posts as a source for a platform rule. If the only place a claim appears is a marketing blog, we leave it out.
How do we handle statistics?
Every number links to the publisher's own page. The sentence gives the date, the sample and the method, so you can tell a survey of 1,000 people from a company counting its own users.
When the publisher sells marketing software or services, we say so. Their surveys can still be useful. You should know who paid for them.
We carry a study's own limits with its findings. If the author says a result covers one country or one month, so do we. If we cannot confirm a figure on the publisher's page, we do not use it.
How do we date what we publish?
Each post shows the date it was published and the date it was last updated. We change the updated date only when the substance changes: a new fact, a corrected fact or a changed rule. A typo fix does not count as an update.
Where a fact is likely to move, such as which data a particular AI assistant uses, the post says when it was true ("as of October 2026"). That tells you when to check it again.
Who writes the posts?
Josh Goldberg or Patrick Colton, and the byline says which. Both of us build websites and do the work the posts describe. More about each of us is on the about page.
We use AI tools for outlines, research and first drafts. A person rewrites every draft and checks every fact against its source before it goes up. That is the same rule we follow for client pages, described on our questions page.
What do we say about clients?
We name a client only with the owner's permission, and we keep that permission in writing. We publish only facts about the job itself: what we found, what we did and what the owner holds now. Our two case studies are Anderson Dock & Lift and Insight Investigative Group, Josh's own agency.
We do not publish a client's search numbers until enough time has passed for them to mean something, and when we do, we give the date range and the source. We never publish a client's revenue.
When a client lets us quote something they wrote, we quote it exactly and leave out anything that identifies them unless they agree. The memo in What an AI wrote when it picked our firm was published that way.
What will we not publish?
- A promise of rankings, placement in an AI answer, leads, calls or revenue. Nobody can make one, and Google says so in its own guide to hiring an SEO.
- A figure we cannot source.
- A paid mention. We do not take money to recommend a product, a directory or a company, and we do not use affiliate links.
- Reviews of GEObros that we wrote or marked up ourselves.
What happens when we get something wrong?
Email contact@geobros.ai with the page and what is wrong. If you are right, we fix the page, change its updated date and, when the correction changes the answer, add a line at the end of the post that says what changed and when.
Sources. Google Search Central, "Do You Need an SEO? Tips for Hiring an SEO," developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/do-i-need-seo. Google Search Central, "Creating Helpful, Reliable, People-First Content," developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content.