i run search on my own site first. then i run it on yours.

rankings are a diagnostic, not an outcome.

the standard pitch reports position changes and traffic growth. both are real numbers. neither is the number your board reads.

the disconnect is easy to show. a page can rank first for a term nobody with budget searches. traffic can grow twenty percent from a query that never converts. that is a win by the reported metric, a loss by the real one.

so the measurement has to run to pipeline. the search work and the CRM have to be connected. most SEO engagements skip that part.

i ran a multi-touch attribution engine at MacroFab. it held 92% forecast accuracy across $200M in marketing-sourced pipeline for three years. that is the plumbing this needs. it is why i build it rather than outsource it.

here is what i report instead of a rank tracker screenshot.

three layers, in this order, because each one gates the next.

technical comes first. if a page cannot be crawled and rendered, nothing downstream matters. that means index coverage, render behavior, canonical logic, and internal links.

content is second. depth against the query, entity coverage, and whether the page answers what a buyer typed.

AEO and GEO are third. most Dallas SEO offers do not run this layer at all. answer engines cite differently than a blue-link SERP ranks.

the sequence is in the [B2B marketing audit](/insights/b2b-marketing-audit) framework.

the third layer runs on [AEO](/insights/what-is-answer-engine-optimization).

and on [GEO for B2B](/insights/generative-engine-optimization-for-b2b).

on this site, the AEO layer is not theoretical. these are running now.

B2B SaaS search is a different discipline from local search. most Dallas SEO offers are built for local.

a local business wins on proximity, reviews, and a map pack. a B2B SaaS company wins on topical depth against a buying committee.

the committee changes the work. an evaluator, an owner, and a finance approver search the same purchase differently. they do not convert on the same page.

so the content architecture covers the whole journey, not just the bottom. definitional, comparison, pricing, and vendor-evaluation queries each need a page.

the [B2B SEO engagement](/b2b-seo) covers how that architecture gets built and measured.

cycle length is the other constraint. a six-month cycle means a page shipped today shows revenue two quarters out. interim measurement uses leading indicators.

search and paid answer different questions. running them separately wastes both.

paid tells you within two weeks whether a message converts. organic takes two quarters. so paid is the fastest test bed for organic content decisions.

the loop is concrete. run a query in paid. see which landing page converts and at what cost. build the organic asset for the version that won.

it runs the other direction too. a query producing cheap organic pipeline is worth defending in paid first.

the [paid media work](/b2b-paid-media) runs against the same pipeline number. one attribution model, not two.

the failure mode when they are separate is double-counting. paid claims the conversion. organic claims the same one. the sum exceeds actual pipeline.

it starts with a [30-day diagnostic](/growth-diagnostic).

that is a fixed fee with a written deliverable. i pull the real data, run the three layers, and tell you what is broken.

the output is a prioritized list. every item carries an expected pipeline effect and a rough cost to fix. not a hundred-item checklist sorted by severity.

a lot of buyers stop there and hand the list to their own team. that is a legitimate outcome. i price it to be one.

if you want the work run rather than specified, that becomes an install. first working system in week one. demand engine by day 30. attribution by day 60. playbook by day 90.

the playbook is the point. the system has to run without me.

published, on the [pricing page](/pricing), with what each tier includes.

the diagnostic is a fixed fee. the ongoing engagement is a monthly rate. neither bills hourly.

hourly is wrong here. the value is in the judgment about what not to do. an hourly model pays for volume, which is the opposite incentive.

most search proposals are priced against deliverable counts. so many pages, links, hours. that prices output and ignores whether it moves anything.

[book a session](/contact).

in Dallas-Fort Worth i do it in person. i live here, so that is easy.

bring search console access, the CRM, and the current reporting. one meeting is enough to say whether the problem is technical, content, or measurement.

that read is free. it is usually enough to know whether the rest is worth buying.