Send us Fan Mail

Every advantage you have right now, AI can copy. Your pricing. Your features. Your positioning statement. Give it a good enough prompt and it'll write something that sounds just like you — sometimes better.

In this episode, Jeff Payne breaks down the two things that remain genuinely uncopyable in an AI-saturated market: your brand — the emotional expectation customers have of you before they ever interact with you — and how you actually treat your customers, especially when something goes wrong. Using a 10 year client relationship with Portland periodontist Dr. Kamran Haghighat as a real-world example, Jeff walks through what it looks like to build both, and offers a simple audit CEOs can run on their own business this week.

Send us Fan Mail

In Episode 35, Jeff showed you that once a brand claims a category in AI search, it holds onto it 90% of the time. This episode is the other half of that story.

New data from Semrush and analyst Kevin Indig at Growth Memo, covering more than 1,000 categories inside ChatGPT, shows that only 15.2% of categories currently have a clear owner. The rest — 53.7% — are wide open, with no brand holding a repeatable lead.

Here’s the twist: split those categories by how much actual AI search demand they carry, and ownership gets rarer, not more common, as the stakes go up. The biggest categories, which account for 98% of all demand in the study, have the lowest ownership rate of the entire dataset — just 11.3%. As a result, 89.3% of all AI search demand sits in categories where nobody has locked in the lead.

Jeff also breaks down how ownership varies dramatically by industry — from 61.6% owned in retail to 0% owned in legal — and lays out the strategic question every business owner should be asking their team this week: which of your core categories still has the door open, and are you even trying to be the answer there?

Send us Fan Mail

Somewhere right now, an AI is pitching your product to a potential customer — and you have no idea what it's saying.

In this episode, Jeff breaks down a sharp new piece of research on how leading companies are shaping their AI narrative on purpose, not by accident. AI doesn't read your website and form a balanced opinion — it skims, and it disproportionately weights structural prominence: headers, navigation, footers. What you put in those spots is what AI repeats back to prospects.

Jeff walks through three real examples: how Rippling turned a corporate espionage scandal into an owned-media asset by publishing the story on their own blog first; how Clay engineered near-perfect AI citation accuracy just by moving customer proof into the website footer; and how Lovable rebuilt its pricing FAQ with tables that speak directly to how language models cite information.

This is a practical, no-jargon breakdown for business owners who want to stop hoping AI tells their story right — and start building it where AI is already looking.

Send us Fan Mail

For 15 years, “build authority” has meant backlinks, keyword rankings, and traffic. A new analysis of over 7,000 AI citations across 1,600 URLs just complicated that story: total backlinks, keywords, and traffic showed flat or slightly negative correlation with whether AI platforms actually cite your content. What did predict citations? Word count, sentence count, and readability — a page’s depth and clarity, not its link profile.

In this episode, Jeff Payne breaks down what this means for how business owners should think about authority now that ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google’s AI Overviews are reading content directly instead of ranking links, including one striking real-world example where a longer, more thorough article outperformed a shorter one covering the same topic by more than 60x in total citations. Jeff also flags the wrong lesson to draw from this data—and the right question to ask instead.

Send us Fan Mail

Your last CMO lasted fourteen months. The one before that made it eighteen. The search firm swears this time will be different. It won't be.

In this episode, Jeff Payne breaks down why CMO turnover at early-stage companies isn't a hiring problem — it's a structural one. Marketing never built the equivalent of engineering's individual contributor track, so by the time someone reaches the CMO title, they haven't executed hands-on work in years. That gap used to be survivable. It isn't anymore, now that AI is reshaping marketing workflows month to month instead of year to year.

Jeff also unpacks the deeper incentive problem: marketing is the only C-suite function without an objective scoreboard, which pushes leaders toward safe, conventional choices instead of the bold moves that actually move results.

The proof point: Jeff's team has never staffed a traditional CMO layer for client Daniel Goodwin at Provident 1031 — instead running as his senior execution bench, producing a standing Kiplinger byline, a five-to-one return Masterclass series, and a growing short-form video initiative, all without adding a management layer.

The episode closes with a prediction worth sitting with: within the next two years, a meaningful share of early-stage and mid-market companies may skip the CMO hire entirely in favor of small teams of senior operators who can still do the work.

Send us Fan Mail

A viral Hailey Bieber x Gap denim drop reveals a mechanism every business owner can use: desire is a mental image people want to enter, and it only compounds when every touchpoint reinforces the same one. Jeff Payne breaks down the Compounding Cue, how it extends Decision Blur, and how Burbank Dental Lab and Daniel Goodwin of Provident 1031 put it into practice.

Send us Fan Mail

New data tracking over 1,000 business categories across 6 months of ChatGPT responses reveals something most CEOs haven't priced in: AI search category ownership is remarkably durable. Brands that establish a clear lead keep it 90% of the time, month over month. Brands with a narrow lead constantly lose it.

Jeff explains why the SEO metrics most companies have spent years optimizing — domain authority, organic traffic — barely predict who wins a category in AI search. He unpacks the divergence between being cited as a source and being mentioned as the answer, and why most companies are optimizing for the wrong one. Using a decade-long client relationship with a Portland periodontist as proof, Jeff lays out what it actually takes to build — and defend — durable category ownership in the AI era.

Send us Fan Mail

Users almost never click the links inside an AI-generated answer -- roughly one in a hundred do, across every major platform. So if you’re grading AI search the way you graded a search ad, by the click that lands on your site, the scoreboard reads zero, every time, forever.

That's not proof that the channel doesn’t work. It’s proof you’re using the wrong scoreboard.

In this episode, Jeff makes the case that AI search doesn’t behave like a search ad -- it behaves like a billboard. And billboards were never measured by clicks. They were measured by proxies: awareness, recall, the slow creep of someone typing your name into a search bar weeks later. AI search is asking marketers to relearn a skill that performance marketing let them forget.

Jeff breaks down why traffic is the wrong lens, what to measure instead, and shares how one client is building an unmissable case across a standing Kiplinger byline, a #1 Amazon bestseller, a five-to-one video Masterclass, and a new wave of short-form video -- all without waiting for perfect attribution to prove it's working.

Three questions every CEO can start asking this week, and one free tool that catches the buyer who reads about you but never clicks anything.