Your brief asks for a partner who can quickly build an understanding of your sector, competitive landscape and current positioning. We analysed both websites before writing this proposal. Section 01 sets out what we found.
A search and growth partner for brands, investors and in-house teams, focused on long-term, scalable organic growth where generic SEO falls short and commercial context matters most.
We built and run Salience, which tracks how brands appear across AI answer engines: visibility, share of voice, sentiment, which prompts a brand wins and loses, and which sources the models cite when they answer.
Relevance here: Objectives 1 and 2 of your SOW require an AI citation baseline and ongoing share-of-voice measurement. That is what this platform does, and it is included rather than bought in.
We built and run LogLens, which analyses server logs to show how search engine and AI crawlers actually behave on a site: what gets crawled, how often, what is ignored, and where crawl budget is wasted.
Relevance here: Section 3.1 of your SOW asks for log-file analysis and crawl budget review, including AI crawler accessibility. This is the tooling that produces it.
Selected clients
Includes lead generation programmes for Citation and Eventbrite, both of which depend on organic search for qualified enquiry volume.
All figures are from Google Search Console for the 12 months to 15 August 2026, accessed through our existing SEO Gets licence, together with live AI search and authority data. No client input was required to produce them.
| 12 months to 15 Aug 2026 | KBS Corporate | Knightsbridge |
|---|---|---|
| Organic clicks | 68,008 | 22,840 |
| Impressions | 2,698,423 | 578,109 |
| Click-through rate | 2.52% | 3.95% |
| Average position | 14.89 | 18.58 |
| Domain Rating (Ahrefs) | 28 | 12 |
| Live referring domains | 783 | 571 |
Both sites have an average position between 14 and 19, which places them on the second page of Google. There is substantial impression volume across both sites, and little of it sits in a position that earns a click.
Of the queries Search Console identifies, 93.3% of Knightsbridge clicks come from searches for the Knightsbridge name. The equivalent figure for KBS Corporate is 55.6%.
Knightsbridge recorded 844 non-brand clicks in the 12 months, from 243,933 impressions. That is a click-through rate of 0.35% at an average position of 27. In the last three months, 4,794 of its 4,924 non-brand queries produced no clicks.
The Knightsbridge homepage accounts for 55.5% of page-attributed clicks, rising to 61.2% when a duplicate tracking-parameter version of the same page is included. The top five pages account for 73.6%. On KBS Corporate the homepage accounts for 21.1% and the top five for 34.2%.
This distribution indicates that the commercial service pages below the homepage are not ranking independently. Those pages are where buying intent sits.
We put the core buying question to ChatGPT with web search enabled, and retrieved Google's AI Overview for the main commercial term. Both results are reproduced below.
ChatGPT · web search enabled · United Kingdom"Who are the best business brokers or M&A advisors in the UK to sell my business with profits around £500k?"
The six firms it recommended:
dns Corporate Advisory
Churchfield Business Brokers
Hornblower Business Brokers
Entrepreneurs Hub
Dexterity Partners
Archer Fleming
Google AI Overview · "sell my business uk" · United KingdomAn AI Overview occupies the first result slot, placing the first organic listing at position two. The sources cited were:
Reddit
Federation of Small Businesses
Xero
GOV.UK
North Norfolk District Council
BusinessesForSale.com
Selling My Business
We repeated the exercise across six buying questions covering both brands' segments. The results are consistent.
| Question asked | Who the model named | K3 brand cited |
|---|---|---|
| Best UK brokers to sell a business, ~£500k profit (KBS segment) | dns Corporate Advisory, Churchfield, Hornblower, Entrepreneurs Hub, Dexterity Partners, Archer Fleming | No |
| Sell a small business, turnover under £1m, ~£150k profit (Knightsbridge segment) | County Business Sales, Abercorn, Transworld, Hornblower, Ernest Wilson | No |
| Selling to an Employee Ownership Trust, and who advises | Scottish Enterprise, Thorntons, Armstrong Watson, Azets, Grant Thornton | No |
| How to value a UK business before selling, and who should do it | Evelyn Partners, Evolve Corporate Finance, Cattaneo, Hyde House | No |
| Google AI Overview: "sell my business uk" | Reddit, FSB, Xero, GOV.UK, North Norfolk District Council, BusinessesForSale.com | No |
| Buying an established UK business, best brokers and listings | BusinessesForSale.com, Daltons, Rightbiz, Knightsbridge (ranked 4th), Christie & Co, Hilton Smythe | Yes |
The buy-side citation is instructive. That page states its numbers in plain, extractable text, so the model was able to read them, quote them and rank the brand on them. The sell-side pages do not provide equivalent material.
Note: ChatGPT localises these answers, and in testing it returned adviser shortlists for South Wales, Glasgow and Birmingham. Neither brand appeared in any of those regional answer sets.
One KBS Corporate page, /business-brokers/, ranks in the top ten for nine competitive commercial terms, several of them in the top three, against keyword difficulty scores of 24 to 51. This is the strongest asset either site has.
| Keyword | Position | Volume | Difficulty | Est. traffic |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| business broker | 1 | 500 | 44 | 264 |
| business sale broker | 2 | 200 | 42 | 32 |
| broker business for sale | 2 | 150 | 24 | 25 |
| business brokerage | 3 | 150 | 34 | 15 |
| business brokers uk | 4 | 200 | 51 | 45 |
| business sales broker | 4 | 150 | 42 | 19 |
| best business brokers uk | 6 | 150 | 27 | 8 |
| business brokers | 7 | 400 | 51 | 20 |
Ahrefs, United Kingdom, August 2026. A second page, /guide-to-selling-a-limited-company/, holds a further seven top-ten non-brand positions.
This matters more than any single ranking. It shows the domain can compete for commercial sell-side terms at this authority level. The problem is that the pattern stops there. Knightsbridge, by contrast, has only two genuine non-brand top-ten rankings across the whole site, "accounting firms for sale" and "commercial cleaning business for sale", and both are buy-side.
KBS Corporate is cited at position one in the Google AI Overview for eot disadvantages and employee ownership trust pros and cons, each around 200 searches a month. Both return an estimated zero traffic. Search Console shows the same page sitting at organic positions 19 to 42 for the wider EOT question set.
| Query (KBS Corporate, last 3 months) | Impressions | Clicks | Organic position |
|---|---|---|---|
| employee ownership trust explained | 1,101 | 0 | 19.1 |
| what is an employee ownership trust | 985 | 0 | 41.9 |
| employee ownership trust pros and cons | 947 | 0 | 19.7 |
| what is an eot | 920 | 0 | 51.3 |
| employee ownership trust | 911 | 0 | 33.5 |
| employee ownership trust disadvantages | 816 | 0 | 18.1 |
| eot explained | 592 | 0 | 14.8 |
The page is good enough for Google to quote in an AI Overview, and not visible enough in the organic results beneath it to earn a click. Seven queries, 6,272 impressions and no clicks over three months, on a topic Google itself names as one of three main exit routes for a UK business owner. Across the site, 72 non-brand queries sit in positions 5 to 20 with over 300 impressions each, producing 42,214 impressions and 182 clicks in total.
This is the pattern the programme is designed to address: existing assets that are close to working, on decision-stage queries, held back by authority and on-page structure rather than by a lack of content.
Search Console data alone shows the same content live on more than one URL on both sites, which splits authority between the versions:
| Duplicate pair | Clicks | Avg. position |
|---|---|---|
| knightsbridgeplc.com/meet-the-team | 824 | 8.9 |
| knightsbridgeplc.com/about/meet-the-team/ | 661 | 7.8 |
| knightsbridgeplc.com/selling-a-business | 82 | 8.2 |
| knightsbridgeplc.com/selling-a-business/ (trailing slash) | 83 | 19.9 |
| kbscorporate.com/completed-deals/…grahams-machinery… | 174 | 8.1 |
| kbscorporate.com/resources/completed-deals/…grahams-machinery… | 167 | 4.9 |
A page indexed twice splits its authority and leaves Google to select which version to rank.
The /selling-a-business pair shows the effect: two versions of one commercial page, one at position 8.2 and one at 19.9. The pattern is systematic rather than isolated. A CMS migration will either resolve it or carry it forward.
KBS Corporate and Knightsbridge are separated commercially by deal size, but they compete for an overlapping category vocabulary in search. Neither currently ranks well for it.
| Query | KBS Corporate | Knightsbridge |
|---|---|---|
| business brokers uk | 14.8 | 41.4 |
| selling a business | 40.9 | 56.6 |
| how to sell a business | 35.2 | 61.5 |
| business broker | 9.2 | 37.5 |
Average position, last three months. Lower is better.
Your Statement of Work raises the same question in relation to the K3 Deal Advisory website. We would want to answer it in Discovery, before either site invests in the same content clusters: which brand targets which intent, split by deal size.
Note on method. Search Console anonymises a proportion of queries, so brand and non-brand shares are calculated across identified queries only, being 33.5% of KBS Corporate clicks and 54.8% of Knightsbridge clicks. Historical data in this Search Console view begins 2 April 2025, so no like-for-like year-on-year comparison is available. Establishing a clean baseline is the first Discovery deliverable.
The structure below maps to Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 4 of your Statement of Work, applied across both KBS Corporate and Knightsbridge.
Full technical audit of both sites, producing one prioritised, RAG-rated roadmap with owners, dependencies and target dates.
IA redesign and pillar-and-cluster build around commercial intent, structured for both classical ranking and generative synthesis.
We can deliver everything else in your Statement of Work. Digital PR is the exception, and we would rather flag that at this stage than claim it.
Not a core deliverable. Recommendations will be written to remain valid after a move to headless, and to resolve the URL duplication in Finding 06 rather than carry it forward.
You have identified a possible move to headless Contentful as a future direction rather than a deliverable of this engagement. This is an area we specialise in. We handle enterprise migrations and re-platforming, and we are also brought in to diagnose and fix migrations that have gone wrong. Carl has spoken and written on the subject at length over a number of years.
Background listening: Carl on enterprise re-platforming and SEO, Inside Commerce podcast.A large number of organisations are currently moving WordPress installations to headless solutions. It can be done well, but it needs to be done with care, and every migration carries trade-offs that should be understood before the decision is taken rather than after. Re-platforming projects commonly lose organic revenue when the design is migrated and the search equity is not.
There are three consequences during this engagement. The IA will be expressed as a content model, covering entry types, fields and relationships, so it can be implemented in Contentful directly rather than retrofitted. Each technical recommendation will be marked as either a fix for the current WordPress site or a specification for the new platform. The URL duplication in Finding 06 will be resolved within the migration mapping.
Your covering note refers to this as a two-month project. Having looked at the data, we do not think the commercial objective, which is lead volume from organic search, is achievable in two months across two websites. The findings in Section 01 are the reason: average positions of 15 to 19, and Domain Ratings of 28 and 12, are not two-month problems. Both options below are longer than that, and we would rather set it out now than agree to a timescale we do not believe in.
Option 1 delivers the programme. Option 2 delivers the same programme and then runs it for a further nine months. Option 1 costs less in total because a three-month engagement carries far less programme management, reporting and ongoing support than a twelve-month one, and because it is committed in a single block. Option 2 costs more because you have us engaged across the year rather than handing over at month three, which is the right choice if what you want is a long-term partner on the account.
You have said you want to move quickly, and a Contentful decision is in prospect, so our recommendation is Option 1.
Fees are invoiced up front at the start of each month, on 30-day terms. Work begins once the first invoice is settled and access has been granted. Link acquisition is invoiced separately as placements are confirmed.
The twelve-month programme carries a break clause at month six, exercisable on 30 days' written notice. If the break is not exercised, the agreement continues for the full twelve months. Option 1 is a fixed three-month engagement with no ongoing commitment.
Both options are quoted for the two websites named in the Statement of Work. Extension to further K3 trading subsidiaries can be priced on the same per-site basis, preserving the group-wide standards for tracking, tagging and reporting taxonomy set out in Section 1. Link acquisition is quoted separately and priced per publication, typically in the hundreds to low thousands per placement depending on the title. All fees exclude VAT and third-party tooling.
Every recommendation is delivered in the same five-part structure, formatted for both the working team and steering committee reporting. Provided as a secure HTML report or Google Docs, whichever your teams prefer.
What the issue or opportunity is
Why it matters commercially
The supporting data and evidence
How we recommend resolving it
Priority, effort and expected impact
Standing deliverables across the programme are the prioritised technical roadmap, the IA blueprint and cluster plan with page-level briefs, the on-page optimisation checklist, the editorial governance model including the approval workflow for AI-assisted content required by Section 9.3, and the KPI tracker covering rankings, AI citation share, referring domain quality and organic-attributed leads. Where implementation sits with your developers, we provide the specification and QA the result.
The costs above are indicative and sent early on purpose, to establish whether we are broadly aligned before either side puts more time in. If they are roughly right, we would suggest a call with the wider team to work through the findings and agree priorities. If they are not, tell us the number you had in mind and we will be straight with you about what it buys.
Reply to Carl