# Three answer-section teaching adaptations Prepared 6 October 2026. These are adaptations of approved public source material, not corrections to deliberately weak drafts. No measured outcome is claimed. All original source passages and qualifications are retained below. # Answer-section working record Unfinished working draft. This record does not verify facts, approve publication or predict citations. Review the sources, qualifications and proposed wording before use. Teaching guide: https://seoinformatica.com/answer-block-writing-framework/ Working copy: A01: Starting price and agreed scope Scope: this selected working copy only. Other drafts in the composer are not included. Reader review fields may be empty. ## Current draft ### Question or section heading What does the AI SEO plan cost, and what is agreed before work starts? ### Direct answer The AI SEO plan starts at $1,111 a month, with three months to begin\. Setup is month one, followed by two months of Compound toward an agreed goal\. After that, the plan runs month by month\. ### Evidence and what it supports Our AI SEO service page states the starting fee and initial term\. It also says the proposal names the work, responsibilities and fee before we begin\. ### Evidence reference or URL https://seoinformatica\.com/ai\-seo/ ### Source publication or update date and context 2026\-10\-05 \(source\-page update date\) ### Qualification and limits This is a starting fee, not an all\-inclusive quote\. The exact fee depends on the layers your business needs and is confirmed on the free Clarity Call\. ### Optional next action Book a free Clarity Call to discuss the scope and fee\. You can request the call directly; the Outside View is optional\. ### Optional next-action URL /start/ ### Reviewer \(Not recorded\) ### Reader review date \(Not recorded\) ### Editorial notes or unresolved questions \(Not recorded\) ## Retained teaching context Example: A01: Starting price and agreed scope Original source: AI SEO service page Source URL: https://seoinformatica.com/ai-seo/ Source-page update: 2026-10-05 Repository snapshot retained: 2026-10-06 Source context: Current offer and service scope in the retained source; not a measured outcome. The retained date records when this teaching snapshot was prepared. It is not the reader’s review date. ### Exact answer to “What does AI SEO cost?” The plan starts at $1,111 a month, with three months to begin: Setup in month one, then two months of Compound toward a goal we agree before we start\. After that it runs month by month\. The exact fee depends on the layers your business needs and is confirmed on the free Clarity Call\. You can request the call directly; the Outside View is optional\. The proposal names the work, responsibilities and fee before we begin\. ## Editorial rationale - Put the price and initial term in the direct answer\. The source already states both clearly; this is an adaptation, not a correction\. - Keep the scope qualification beside the answer instead of deleting it to shorten the section\. - Identify the service page as evidence of the offered terms, not evidence of an outcome\. - Preserve the choice of next step\. A written Outside View is optional\. ## Teaching limits This example does not establish lower cost, better value, guaranteed scope or results\. The starting fee must not become an all\-inclusive quote\. General limits: these examples are editorial adaptations of existing source material, not measured citation, ranking or enquiry experiments. A source describing an offer supports the offered terms; it does not independently prove an outcome. A completed record is not publication approval. --- # Answer-section working record Unfinished working draft. This record does not verify facts, approve publication or predict citations. Review the sources, qualifications and proposed wording before use. Teaching guide: https://seoinformatica.com/answer-block-writing-framework/ Working copy: A02: Service fit and a relevant next step Scope: this selected working copy only. Other drafts in the composer are not included. Reader review fields may be empty. ## Current draft ### Question or section heading Is this AI SEO implementation plan a fit for my business? ### Direct answer The plan is particularly relevant to established B2B service businesses, including consultancies, advisory firms and specialist providers, that need research, writing and implementation in one agreed scope\. We serve the United States and United Kingdom first, with suitable businesses elsewhere\. ### Evidence and what it supports Our AI SEO service page describes the intended businesses, delivery scope and two ways to start\. This is our stated service scope, not independent evidence of performance\. ### Evidence reference or URL https://seoinformatica\.com/ai\-seo/ ### Source publication or update date and context 2026\-10\-05 \(source\-page update date\) ### Qualification and limits We also work with launches, rebuilds and businesses chosen by location\. The first move depends on your starting point\. If you only need a monitoring tool or advice for your existing team to execute, establish that before choosing an implementation plan\. ### Optional next action Go directly to a free Clarity Call to discuss your goal, the layers and the price, or start with the optional written Outside View\. ### Optional next-action URL /start/ ### Reviewer \(Not recorded\) ### Reader review date \(Not recorded\) ### Editorial notes or unresolved questions \(Not recorded\) ## Retained teaching context Example: A02: Service fit and a relevant next step Original source: AI SEO service page Source URL: https://seoinformatica.com/ai-seo/ Source-page update: 2026-10-05 Repository snapshot retained: 2026-10-06 Source context: Current offer and service scope in the retained source; not a measured outcome. The retained date records when this teaching snapshot was prepared. It is not the reader’s review date. ### Exact fit paragraph The plan is particularly relevant to established B2B service businesses such as consultancies, advisory firms and specialist providers\. United States and United Kingdom first; suitable businesses elsewhere\. Owners and small teams get the research, writing and implementation in one agreed scope\. ### Exact starting-point qualification We also work with launches, rebuilds and businesses chosen by location\. The first move depends on your starting point\. If you only need a monitoring tool or advice for an existing team to execute, establish that before choosing an implementation plan\. ### Exact next-step passage Start with the Outside View: how you look from the outside, who really competes with you, and the ten fixes that matter\. Free, in writing, within two business days\. Or go directly to a free Clarity Call to discuss the goal, the layers and the price\. The written first look is optional\. ## Editorial rationale - Make the service fit explicit without changing who can be considered\. - Preserve the market qualifier and the alternative starting points: launches, rebuilds and businesses chosen by location\. - Distinguish a service description from independent evidence of performance\. - Offer a relevant next action without making a written review mandatory\. ## Teaching limits This adaptation does not diagnose the reader’s need or establish their eligibility\. A stated service scope does not prove that the plan is the right purchase for every reader\. General limits: these examples are editorial adaptations of existing source material, not measured citation, ranking or enquiry experiments. A source describing an offer supports the offered terms; it does not independently prove an outcome. A completed record is not publication approval. --- # Answer-section working record Unfinished working draft. This record does not verify facts, approve publication or predict citations. Review the sources, qualifications and proposed wording before use. Teaching guide: https://seoinformatica.com/answer-block-writing-framework/ Working copy: A03: A research finding with its denominator and limits Scope: this selected working copy only. Other drafts in the composer are not included. Reader review fields may be empty. ## Current draft ### Question or section heading What did the June 2026 crawler\-access sample actually record? ### Direct answer In the reviewed 50\-site sample for edition 2026\.06, all 50 primary service pages returned HTTP 200 to the study’s collector\. The stored OAI\-SearchBot allowed flag was true in all 50 records\. These observations describe the collector’s responses and stored flags, not authenticated visits by OpenAI or any other named platform\. ### Evidence and what it supports The Crawler Access Study’s 2026\.06 Access Findings table reports 50/50 HTTP 200 responses and 50/50 OAI\-SearchBot allowed flags\. Its adjacent limitation paragraph records robots\-file responses of 200 for 48 records, 406 for one and 404 for one\. ### Evidence reference or URL https://seoinformatica\.com/ai\-visibility\-benchmark/ai\-crawler\-access\-study/\#2026\-06\-access\-findings ### Source publication or update date and context 2026\-10\-05 \(source\-page update\); edition 2026\.06 \(observation period\) ### Qualification and limits Both non\-200 robots\-file records still have every allowed flag set to true, and the response\-handling implementation is not supplied\. The sample selected accessible sites and did not measure actual citations\. These historical counts do not establish current access, authenticated platform visits or citation likelihood\. ### Optional next action Inspect the full access table and its limitations before using the finding\. ### Optional next-action URL /ai\-visibility\-benchmark/ai\-crawler\-access\-study/ ### Reviewer \(Not recorded\) ### Reader review date \(Not recorded\) ### Editorial notes or unresolved questions \(Not recorded\) ## Retained teaching context Example: A03: A research finding with its denominator and limits Original source: AI Crawler Access Study: 2026.06 Access Findings Source URL: https://seoinformatica.com/ai-visibility-benchmark/ai-crawler-access-study/ Source-page update: 2026-10-05 Repository snapshot retained: 2026-10-06 Source context: Historical edition 2026.06; reviewed 50-site sample. Counts are recorded fields, not current access tests. The retained date records when this teaching snapshot was prepared. It is not the reader’s review date. ### Exact access-field table \| Recorded field or flag \| Count \| Percent \| \| \-\-\- \| \-\-\- \| \-\-\- \| \| Primary service page returned HTTP 200 \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| Googlebot allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| Bingbot allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| OAI\-SearchBot allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| GPTBot allowed \| 49/50 \| 98% \| \| ChatGPT\-User allowed \| 49/50 \| 98% \| \| ClaudeBot allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| Claude\-SearchBot allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| Claude\-User allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| PerplexityBot allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| Perplexity\-User allowed \| 50/50 \| 100% \| \| Noindex present \| 0/50 \| 0% \| \| Nosnippet present \| 0/50 \| 0% \| ### Exact adjacent limitation These are stored permission flags and responses to the study's collector, not authenticated visits by the named platforms\. Robots\-file responses were 200 for 48 records, 406 for one and 404 for one\. Both non\-200 rows still have all allowed flags set to true; the response\-handling implementation is not supplied\. The sample selected accessible sites and did not measure actual citations\. ## Editorial rationale - Select two useful figures without presenting them as the entire dataset\. The complete source table stays available above\. - Keep the population, denominator, period and collector method with the direct answer\. - Retain the unexpected robots responses and unavailable response\-handling implementation\. - Do not rename stored permission flags as observed platform visits or a citation result\. ## Teaching limits The source is evidence of the published study record, not an independent repeat of collection\. This teaching adaptation does not show that the section earned citations\. General limits: these examples are editorial adaptations of existing source material, not measured citation, ranking or enquiry experiments. A source describing an offer supports the offered terms; it does not independently prove an outcome. A completed record is not publication approval.