Free tool · powered by Essentras

Will AI cite makao.com.au?

AI Visibility Score, last checked 28 Aug 2026.

AI Visibility Score
29/100

Niche ESD consultancy with zero third-party brand mentions; needs earned press, case studies, and Wikipedia disambiguation to become AI-citable.

8/100
Entity authority
55/100
On-page

Currently near-invisible to AI engines: no Knowledge Panel, no Wikipedia page for this entity, and zero independent third-party mentions naming Makao (makao.com.au) as an ESD consultancy. All 14 search results refer to unrelated entities—restaurants, card games, a Thai footballer, prediction markets—none about this Australian engineering firm. Without earned media, industry press, or client testimonials published on independent domains, engines have no corpus signal that this brand exists or is authoritative.

Entity authority

How much AI already trusts you across the web — the biggest driver of citations, and the hardest to DIY.

Brand mentions & press (share of voice)
8/100

Zero distinct third-party domains mention Makao (makao.com.au) as an ESD consultancy; all 14 search results refer to unrelated entities (restaurants, card games, a footballer, prediction markets).

Fix: Earn mentions on independent industry sites: publish client case studies on architecture/construction media, contribute to sustainability forums, secure press in Australian property or green-building outlets, and get listed in ESD/engineering directories.

Get tier-1 press placements · from $250
Knowledge Panel & entity clarity
15/100

No Google Knowledge Panel and no recognizable entity footprint; the brand is indistinguishable from unrelated homonyms in search results.

Fix: Build entity clarity: maintain consistent NAP (name, address, phone) across directories, claim and optimize Google Business Profile, and earn structured citations on LinkedIn, industry associations, and local business listings.

Get a Google Knowledge Panel · from $650
Wikipedia & reference-corpus presence
0/100

No Wikipedia page for Makao (makao.com.au); the only Wikipedia result is for an unrelated Thai footballer, offering zero reference-corpus signal for this consultancy.

Fix: Wikipedia is earned, not created. Focus first on third-party press coverage and industry recognition; once notable, a volunteer editor may create a page, or you can propose one with independent sources.

Get a Wikipedia page · $4,000, money-back

On-page extractability

How easily AI can read, understand, and quote this specific page.

Information gain (original data & quotes)
35/100

Page contains service descriptions and client types but no original data, case-study metrics, or unique quotes—mostly restated value propositions found on similar consultancy sites.

Fix: Publish original research: energy-savings statistics from real projects, before-and-after performance data, client testimonials with measurable outcomes, or industry benchmarks unique to your practice.

Publish a cite-worthy article on MarketSpy · $9.99 intro
Extractable structure (answer-first, lists, tables)
52/100

Headings are present and some sections are answer-first, but many are vague taglines; no FAQ blocks, comparison tables, or structured lists of services with clear one-question-per-heading format.

Fix: Add FAQ schema blocks answering common ESD questions, create comparison tables (e.g., NABERS vs Green Star), and rewrite headings as explicit questions or statements (e.g., 'What is Section J compliance?' instead of 'advance what's possible').

Publish a cite-worthy article on MarketSpy · $9.99 intro
Freshness
45/100

Founding date (2018) is present in schema, but no visible article dates, project timestamps, or 'last updated' markers on the page itself.

Fix: Add visible publication or update dates to blog posts, case studies, and service pages; refresh content quarterly and timestamp it to signal recency to crawlers.

Technical eligibility (crawlable, AI bots allowed)
95/100

No AI crawlers blocked in robots.txt; page is server-rendered with 1235 words visible to bots, and all major engines can access it.

Schema & on-page E-E-A-T
68/100

Comprehensive Organization schema with founder name (Kelvin Mureithi), founding date, area served, and social profiles; no Article or FAQ schema, and no visible author bylines or credentials on the page.

Fix: Add named author bylines with credentials to blog posts and case studies, implement FAQ schema for common questions, and consider Article schema for thought-leadership content.

Publish a cite-worthy article on MarketSpy · $9.99 intro

What to fix, ranked by impact

Highest-leverage first. Purple/green = Essentras can do it for you; grey = a do-it-yourself win.

Tier-1 press placementsfrom $250

Being named on independent, trusted publications is the strongest correlate of AI citation — it beats backlinks and domain authority. This is the #1 lever.

Fix this →
Business Insider / Yahoo / AP News bundle$840 (was $1,860)

Three tier-1 outlets AI engines already read and cite — the fastest way to build the third-party mentions AI weighs most.

Fix this →
Google Knowledge Panelfrom $650

A Knowledge Panel is how Google and AI Overviews confirm you are a real entity worth citing.

Fix this →
Wikipedia page creation$4,000, money-back

Wikipedia is ~48% of ChatGPT’s cited sources. With no page, AI has no canonical reference to cite about you.

Fix this →
MarketSpy placement ($9.99 intro)$9.99

A professional, AI-indexed article about you on a real outlet — the fastest, cheapest way to give assistants something concrete to quote.

Fix this →
Add original data or a direct quoteDIY

Information gain is the top causal on-page lever (+22-41% in controlled tests). Add a stat, benchmark, or quote no other page has — restating consensus barely helps.

Make it answer-first and extractableDIY

Lead each section with a 1-3 sentence direct answer, then a list or real table. One heading = one question. AI can only cite what it can cleanly extract.

Show a real, recent update dateDIY

AI-cited content is ~26% fresher on average; Perplexity leans hardest on recency. Refresh commercial pages every 60-90 days with a genuine last-updated date.

Don’t waste time on

  • Obsessing over schema / JSON-LD. Controlled before/after tests show it has no causal lift on AI citations. Keep it for normal Google rich results, but do not over-invest expecting AI to cite you because of it.
  • Adding an llms.txt file. AI crawlers do not read it (Google confirmed; ~0.1% of AI-bot requests hit it). It is speculative, not a ranking factor.
  • Chasing word count. Correlation between length and AI citation is ~0.04 (basically none). Originality and structure beat length every time.

How to fix this fast

AI barely sees you. The fastest fix is a citation on a source it already trusts.

We write and publish a professional article about you on a real, AI-cited outlet, indexed by Google and citeable by ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity. Get your first placement for $9.99.

Check any URL free at essentras.com/tools/ai-visibility-score.