It’s the possibility that Google turns websites into unpaid AI training/data sources while keeping users inside its own ecosystem.
If AI Mode answers everything directly, then what exactly are small publishers, bloggers and niche sites supposed to survive on long-term?
We’ve been noticing something interesting while tracking AI referral traffic.
ChatGPT (and similar LLMs) are sending users to URLs that don’t actually exist on the site, but are close enough to real pages that they look valid.
When users click those, they land on a 404 and drop off, and we end up losing high-intent traffic without even realizing it.
What’s happening here is that LLMs don’t always link to exact URLs. They sometimes generate paths that approximate the right page, but miss the exact structure.
If AI is sending you traffic, there’s a good chance some links are breaking like this
Quick way to check:
Those are essentially hallucinated URLs.
Fix:
Feels like one of those early AI-search quirks that’s easy to miss if you’re not looking for it
Google says llms.txt isn’t needed for generative AI search, but at the same time it’s pushing UCP and agent-friendly website guidance.
That makes me wonder if we’re focusing on the wrong layer.
A lot of AEO/GEO advice is still about helping LLMs read or cite content.
But agentic search feels different. The bigger question may be:
Can an agent understand your site, navigate it, trust the data, and complete a task?
That shifts attention toward entity structure, feeds, semantic HTML, accessibility tree, structured actions, stable workflows, and clear agent policies.
Not saying UCP is a ranking factor. But it feels like a stronger signal than llms.txt about where the web is going.
Are you implementing llms.txt, or prioritizing agent-ready structure instead?
I think AI search optimization is moving from “answer visibility” to “execution readiness.”
A lot of AEO/GEO advice still sounds like: write clear content so ChatGPT/Perplexity can mention you.
But if Search is becoming more agentic, the real question may be:
Can an agent understand your site, trust the page, navigate the workflow, and complete a task?
That changes what matters: entity clarity, schema, internal links, comparison pages, accessible UI, stable layouts, crawlable flows, and content that explains not just “what this is” but “what can be done here.”
Not saying Lighthouse’s new Agentic Browsing checks are a ranking factor. But they do feel like a hint about where optimization is heading.
Are you already preparing sites for agentic browsing, or still mostly focused on AI citations?
Hi, I’m currently working on SEO for our website, which is focused on horse sales.
I still have a few things to improve, like creating separate pages for all services and an “About Us” page. The website is bilingual (English and Slovak), and we currently have around 30 horses listed in both language versions.
For new horse listings, I recently started using different image variations and unique ALT texts for images. My question is: what’s the ideal way to write ALT text for horse listings?
Each horse usually has 3–4 photos. Is it okay to use a similar ALT text structure for every horse, for example:
“(Horse Name) show jumping horse for sale”
and just change the horse’s name?
Also, is it okay to use a similar title and description structure for each horse listing, while only changing the horse name, or should every description be completely unique for better SEO?
Hi everyone,
I have 5+ years of experience in Digital Marketing, but I’m still relatively new to SEO. Recently, I started handling the SEO for a SaaS website.
I’d love to know, what should I focus on first to build a strong foundation and get early results?
Should I prioritize:
- Technical SEO
- Keyword research
- Content strategy
- Backlinks
- Internal linking
-CRO + SEO alignment
Something else?
Would really appreciate any advice, frameworks, or common mistakes to avoid when working on SEO for a SaaS company.
Here's what Google announced at I/O 2026. And what it means for SEO:
At Google I/O 2026, they announced:
→ AI Mode hit 1 billion monthly users
→ A brand new AI-powered Search box (biggest upgrade in 25 years)
→ Search agents that scan the web 24/7 on your behalf
→ Google will literally call businesses for you
→ Search can now build custom mini apps and dashboards on the fly
Let me be direct with you.
If you're still optimizing for clicks, you're already behind.
Here's the hard truth:
AI Overviews answer questions directly in the results page. Search agents will monitor the web and synthesize information for users.
Google will handle bookings for local businesses in categories like home repair, beauty, and pet care.
Zero-click searches? They're not coming. They're already here.
Most businesses can’t see it. Or maybe they don’t want to see it.
So what should businesses do?
Change the SEO game. It’s just about clicks anymore.
The new # 1 position isn't ranking on page one. It's the source Google's AI uses to answer a question.
This means:
→ Your content needs to be structured so AI can read and cite it
→ Freshness matters more than ever (agents scan real-time data)
→ E-E-A-T signals are no longer optional
→ Your Google Business Profile is now a frontline asset
→ Long, conversational queries will replace keyword searches
Businesses that adapt early will win.
Those still playing the old keyword game? They'll feel it soon.
Are you adapting your strategy for this shift?
Hey all, I’ve been posting about my SaaS (link included) on otehr Reddit communities from time to time and recently noticed something off in my backlink profile.
I’ve started seeing a lot of random, low‑quality backlinks pointing to my site from 0‑DA / obvious spam domains (blog networks, auto‑generated niche sites, etc.). These links don’t look natural at all and seem unrelated to the kind of coverage I’d expect for a domain intelligence focused product.
What’s interesting is that I’ve shared several of my other domains on Reddit across different communities in the past, and this is the first time I’m seeing this kind of spammy backlink pattern. With those other domains I never got hit with waves of weird, low‑quality links so it is all new to me.
I’m curious if anyone else building a SaaS has noticed something similar:
Would like to hear if this is a broader thing or is it just me..
I wanted to know that if content written by ai and images generated by ai ranks or not? Like I have been writing high quality in-depth content but still not getting traffic (it’s like 10 impressions or below) my website is almost 40 days old and I want to know that what I’m doing wrong or maybe my website got hit my google updates released on 7-11 may please give your suggestions thanks 🙏
My site is almost a year old now and I’m getting impressions in Search Console, but the clicks are still really low, so I’m not sure if this is normal slow SEO growth or if I’m missing something obvious.
For the last 28 days in Search Console:
43.8K impressions
79 clicks
0.2% CTR
17.6 average position
this is a tech website review: comparigon . com
Got pitched a link last week. DR 71, "premium SaaS publication." Clicked through. The site was publishing posts about CRM software, kitchen renovation, payday loans, and crypto in the same week, half by the same writer. The DR was real but the site was garbage.
That's the pattern. Every time I've been burned on a placement, the metric looked fine going in, it was something else I should've caught first. So now I check DR last, almost as a tiebreaker, and start with this:
>Who else does the site link out to. Fastest filter there is. Open three recent posts, scan the external links. If a "marketing blog" is sending traffic to a debt consolidation service, a forex broker, and a CBD vendor, that tells you what the site is. Your article becomes the next one in that lineup.
>Does the page itself make sense for the link. Relevant domain but irrelevant article doesn't help much. The paragraphs around the link need to give it a reason to exist. If a real reader hits that section and the link feels dropped in, Google can probably tell too.
>Traffic shape, not volume. A site with 80k monthly visits where none of it overlaps with the client's topic is worth less than a 5k site ranking for things the client actually cares about. The smaller, focused site wins almost every time for me.
>Is the target page worth the link. This one I ignored for years. You can land a strong backlink pointing at a page that's not built to absorb it, no internal links to anything important, no depth, no path for authority to flow to the pages that need ranking. Fix the target before chasing the link.
DR/DA still gets checked at the end. If everything else clears and the metric is also good, great. If the metric's strong but the rest looks rough, I pass faster than I used to.
I've heard people talking about CMS's impact on ranking. Is it true? Are there some favourable CMS for search engines? If yes, what are those and why?
Google just announced a big change to the search box.... announced at their I/O event.
The white search bar is being turned into a dynamic AI tool powered by Gemini 3.5 Flash.
This is starting to roll out today in countries and languages where AI Mode is available.
Google is about to launch Information Agents that monitor web changes 24/7 and read everything then summarize it back to you. AI Overviews already ate half the click-through, and once this rolls out publishers' traffic will probably get squeezed even more. What do you think, will it keep eating web traffic?
What actually worked for you in SEO when starting from 0?
Fully organic. No paid ads, no audience.
Was it mostly blogs?
Or something else entirely?
Curious what got people their first real traffic/customers:
What would you do again? and what was a waste of time?
I am curious how people here are thinking about Google Discover in the current landscape.
For those getting Discover traffic consistently, what seems to be moving the needle most right now?
Things I’m trying to understand better:
Also interested in the flip side:
What used to work for Discover that doesn’t seem to work anymore?
Would love to hear real-world experience rather than generic SEO advice.
Previously, we avoided working with clients who wanted to approve domains before starting.
The process was too long and stressful. You could spend a month negotiating, only to end up with no commitment.
The main problem was simple: you can’t always match every lead’s expectations manually.
One site might be relevant, but still far from what the client had in mind.
So we solved it by building our own marketplace.
Now you can choose domains based on your own needs
Do you think it was worth creating, or was it just time-wasting?
Let's say I run a pop-up shop agency and I am making blogs for my site.
The correct spelling is "pop-up shop" but "pop up shop" (no hyphen) gets way more monthly search volume.
Should I just use the unhyphenated version throughout my site to rank better? Or does Google treat them as the same thing anyway?
Edit: Sorry if this is a basic question, but I want to make sure that proper grammar is the better choice.
I've seen this happen a lot with local service businesses.
A business wants more leads from nearby cities, so the first move is usually to create a bunch of city pages.
And I get the logic. More pages = more chances to rank, right?
But from what I've seen, most of these pages don't really turn into leads.
I was reviewing a roofing site recently. They had pages for a bunch of nearby cities, and at first it looked like they were covering their service areas properly.
Then I opened the pages. Almost every page was the same (same service text, claims, layout). Only the city name was different.
That's where the problem starts.
A city page can't just tell Google, "We serve this area." It has to make a real customer feel like, "Okay, these people actually work here."
The better city pages I've seen usually have some real local proof behind them.
Things like project photos from that area, reviews from customers in that city, nearby neighborhoods, common local problems, or job examples that make the page feel less like a template.
The other thing people miss is the GBP or local trust signal side.
Sometimes the website says the business serves 20 cities, but there's nothing to support it. No city-specific reviews, no real examples, no local proof, and no clear reason for someone in that city to trust the page.
So the website looks bigger than the business actually is in those areas. And I think both Google and customers notice that.
My takeaway from working on these kinds of projects:
How are you guys handling city pages right now? Are they still working for your local clients, or only when there's real proof the business actually serves that area?
The best way to make your content feel more trustworthy is by using real screenshots and proof instead of generic graphics.
If you’ve ever read blogs from Semrush, you’ll notice how often they use actual screenshots, data, and examples. That instantly builds more trust compared to stock graphics with text on them.
For example, imagine reading a blog about the “best SEO agencies,” and instead of using a random designed image, the company shows a real screenshot of an AI answer or search result where their brand appears.
That not only helps with content quality and media optimization, but it also makes the content feel more genuine and believable for both users and AI systems. It also shows what AI engines are actually saying in real time, so in a way, it becomes live proof of the work instead of just a marketing claim.