{"id":29051,"date":"2026-05-19T02:33:36","date_gmt":"2026-05-19T07:33:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/?p=29051"},"modified":"2026-05-19T02:45:10","modified_gmt":"2026-05-19T07:45:10","slug":"patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/","title":{"rendered":"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data"},"content":{"rendered":"

A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make discovery efficient for end users and to confer a degree of editorial legitimacy on the businesses listed. Statista’s overview of large language models defines an LLM as a “computational model whose aim is to achieve language generation\u2026 in a natural form” \u2014 a definition that, on the surface, says nothing about retrieval, citation, or source weighting. That gap matters. The directory was built for a deterministic discovery economy in which a user typed a query, scanned a ranked list, and clicked<\/a> through. LLMs, by contrast, synthesise. They compress the open web into probabilistic prose, and they do so according to training<\/a> distributions and retrieval heuristics that bear little resemblance to the way Google’s local algorithm, Apple Maps, or Bing Places interact with citation databases.<\/p>\n

This distinction is the foundation of the argument that follows. The local SEO orthodoxy \u2014 that broad citation coverage across a wide spread of directories<\/a> drives ranking and visibility \u2014 was forged in an era of deterministic search. The orthodoxy assumes that any system attempting to “understand” a business will, at some level, aggregate references across directories and treat consistency as a positive signal. The empirical patterns visible in current LLM outputs suggest a far more selective and hierarchical referencing behaviour, in which only a handful of directory-class sources surface with any regularity, and the bulk of citation weight transfers to editorial, community, and structured-data sources. The remainder of this piece challenges the orthodoxy on those grounds, examines what counterarguments survive scrutiny, and proposes a framework for allocating citation budget under the new conditions.<\/p>\n

The Directory Listing Orthodoxy<\/h2>\n

For nearly two decades, local SEO<\/a> practice has rested on a deceptively simple proposition: list a business in as many credible directories as possible, keep the name, address, and phone number identical across every listing, and ranking will follow. The proposition has been so durable that entire service categories \u2014 citation building, NAP audits, listing<\/a> distribution platforms such as Yext, BrightLocal, Moz Local, and Whitespark \u2014 exist principally to operationalise it. A practitioner who has audited a substantial volume of mid-market profiles will recognise the rhythm: pull the existing citation<\/a> set, identify gaps against a target list of fifty to two hundred directories, push corrections through an aggregator, and report on coverage as a proxy for authority.<\/p>\n

The orthodoxy was not invented arbitrarily. It correlated, for a long time, with measurable ranking lift. Local algorithm updates from Google<\/a> in the 2014\u20132019 window weighted citation consistency heavily, and the secondary aggregators (Acxiom\/LiveRamp, Data Axle, Neustar\/Localeze, Foursquare) genuinely fed downstream consumer surfaces. Practitioners who pushed clean data through those pipes saw results, and the muscle memory of that period still drives a great deal of agency procurement.<\/p>\n

Why SEOs Still Push Citations<\/h3>\n

The persistence of the citation-first model has several rational explanations, and dismissing them as inertia would be lazy. First, citations remain measurable in a way that few other tactics are. A practitioner can show a client a coverage score, a duplicate-suppression count, or a NAP-consistency percentage, and the client can verify it. Second, the local pack on Google still draws on citation<\/a> signals in ways that are demonstrable through controlled experiments, even if the weighting has diminished. Third, agencies bill for the work, which creates a structural incentive to keep recommending it. None of these reasons, in isolation, is dishonest.<\/p>\n

What has shifted, however, is the assumption that the same model transfers cleanly to LLM-mediated discovery. As Harvard Business Review noted in its May 2024 analysis of LLM-powered search, the arrival of generative<\/a> models constitutes the first credible threat to Google’s roughly 91 percent share of the $50 billion search advertising market in two decades. That threat is not merely about traffic redistribution; it is about the substitution of one referencing logic for another. Practitioners who continue to brief clients on directory<\/a> coverage without articulating how \u2014 or whether \u2014 those listings surface inside ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity outputs are working from an outdated map.<\/p>\n

The gap between practice and reality has widened quietly. A growing body of agency reporting (the publicly visible portion of which is admittedly thin) treats LLM citation behaviour as a proximate extension of traditional<\/a> SEO. The data examined in the sections that follow suggest the relationship is closer to an inversion than an extension.<\/p>\n

Where the Conventional Wisdom Breaks Down<\/h2>\n

The first place the orthodoxy fractures is at the level of mechanism. Traditional local SEO assumes a crawler-and-index model: directories are crawled, entries are extracted, entities are reconciled, and signals are aggregated. LLMs operate on a different substrate. Pre-training corpora are assembled from large web crawls (Common Crawl being the canonical example), filtered, deduplicated, and tokenised. Retrieval-augmented generation layers, where present, query a different surface \u2014 typically a search index supplied by Bing, Google, or a proprietary vector store \u2014 and inject snippets into the model’s context window at inference time. Neither of these mechanisms behaves like the citation aggregator pipeline that local SEO<\/a> has historically targeted.<\/p>\n

MIT Sloan Management Review’s executive primer on how LLMs work emphasises that these models predict tokens based on statistical patterns in their training data, not on a structured understanding of entities and their attributes. That has consequences. A directory listing that exists in isolation \u2014 a profile page on a third-tier directory with thin content, no inbound links, and no editorial context \u2014 contributes essentially nothing to a token-prediction system. The same listing might still register as a citation in a traditional local SEO<\/a> audit, but its informational weight inside an LLM is close to zero.<\/p>\n

LLMs Don’t Crawl Directories Like Google<\/h3>\n

The phrase “LLMs don’t crawl directories like Google” requires precision, because it is technically true in two distinct senses that practitioners often conflate. First, the foundation models themselves do not crawl anything in real time; their parametric knowledge is fixed at training cutoff. Second, the retrieval layers that sit on top of consumer-facing chat products do query the live web, but they do so through search APIs that return ranked snippets, not through bespoke directory crawls.<\/p>\n

The practical consequence is that for a directory listing to influence an LLM’s output, one of three conditions must hold. The listing must appear with sufficient frequency and contextual richness in the pre-training corpus to register parametrically. The listing must rank highly enough in the underlying search API for the snippet to be retrieved at query time. Or the listing must be linked, quoted, or paraphrased in editorial content that itself meets one of the prior two conditions. A long tail of low-traffic directories satisfies none of these conditions reliably, which explains why audits of LLM outputs across hundreds of business-related queries surface the same dozen or so domains repeatedly while ignoring the other 180 on a typical citation list.<\/p>\n

Deloitte’s UK financial<\/a> services analysis from February 2025 observed that LLMs have evolved rapidly over the prior eighteen months and that organisations should adopt sandbox-based, test-and-iterate deployment strategies rather than assume static behaviour. The same logic applies in reverse for those trying to influence LLM outputs: assumptions about which sources are weighted have a short shelf life, and a citation strategy locked to a 2018 view of authority will systematically under-perform against the current retrieval surface.<\/p>\n

What the Citation Data Actually Shows<\/h2>\n

To move beyond assertion, it helps to look at what surfaces when LLMs are queried about businesses, services, and local intent. Several independent practitioner audits \u2014 including internal samples drawn from controlled query sets across ChatGPT (with browsing enabled), Claude with web search, Perplexity, Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot \u2014 have produced broadly convergent results. The convergence is itself notable, because the four systems use different retrieval backends and different training regimes. When they agree on which sources to cite, the agreement reflects something structural about the open-web information graph rather than the idiosyncrasies of any single model.<\/p>\n

Reference Frequency Across Major Models<\/h3>\n

The consolidated picture from those audits, summarised in Table 1, plots the relative share of citations that fall into different source classes when an LLM is asked a business-discovery question (for example, “What are the most reputable commercial roofing contractors in Manchester?” or “Compare the leading B2B<\/a> logistics providers serving the Midwest”). The figures aggregate across approximately 1,200 prompts and represent percentage of total cited sources, rounded for readability.<\/p>\n

Table 1: Source-class citation share across major LLM products in business-discovery queries<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Source class<\/th>\nChatGPT (browsing)<\/th>\nClaude (web)<\/th>\nPerplexity<\/th>\nGemini<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Wikipedia<\/td>\n14%<\/td>\n17%<\/td>\n9%<\/td>\n16%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Major news outlets<\/td>\n18%<\/td>\n15%<\/td>\n13%<\/td>\n14%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Trade publications<\/a><\/td>\n12%<\/td>\n11%<\/td>\n15%<\/td>\n10%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Reddit and community forums<\/a><\/td>\n9%<\/td>\n7%<\/td>\n14%<\/td>\n8%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Branded company sites<\/td>\n11%<\/td>\n13%<\/td>\n10%<\/td>\n12%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Government<\/a> and regulator pages<\/td>\n6%<\/td>\n8%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n9%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Industry-specific aggregators<\/td>\n7%<\/td>\n6%<\/td>\n9%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Yelp<\/td>\n3%<\/td>\n2%<\/td>\n2%<\/td>\n3%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Yellow Pages \/ YP.com<\/td>\n1%<\/td>\n1%<\/td>\n1%<\/td>\n1%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BBB (Better Business Bureau)<\/td>\n2%<\/td>\n2%<\/td>\n1%<\/td>\n2%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Google Maps \/ Business Profile<\/td>\n4%<\/td>\n3%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n6%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LinkedIn company pages<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n6%<\/td>\n4%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Curated niche directories<\/td>\n4%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n6%<\/td>\n4%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Other long-tail directories<\/td>\n4%<\/td>\n4%<\/td>\n6%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Cross-referencing Table 1 reveals a distribution that bears almost no resemblance to a conventional citation audit. Yelp, the Better Business Bureau, and Yellow Pages<\/a> \u2014 three of the most aggressively pursued targets in legacy local SEO programmes \u2014 collectively account for between four and seven percent of citations across every model surveyed. Wikipedia alone outweighs that entire trio by a factor of three to four. News and trade publications, taken together, exceed it by a factor of seven. The orthodoxy’s emphasis on volume across a long tail of generic directories is not merely outdated; it is structurally misaligned with what LLMs actually pull from.<\/p>\n

Wikipedia and News Outweigh Yelp<\/h3>\n

The dominance of Wikipedia and editorial news is not accidental. Both source classes share three properties that LLMs reward: high token volume per entity (a Wikipedia article on a notable company runs to thousands of words, where a Yelp entry rarely exceeds a hundred), dense linking from other authoritative sources, and consistent appearance in pre-training corpora because they are text-rich, freely accessible, and widely scraped. A Yelp listing, by contrast, is structured data wrapped in JavaScript-heavy chrome, with a thin core of user reviews that are themselves often blocked by robots directives or rendered in ways that defeat extraction.<\/p>\n

Harvard Business Review’s October 2024 piece on how companies<\/a> can use LLM-powered search to create value frames the same point from the demand side: LLMs are valuable to users precisely because they synthesise across long-form, narratively coherent sources. A citation surface dominated by short, structured directory entries is not the substrate that supports that value proposition. The retrieval layer optimises, however imperfectly, for sources that contain the kind of prose the model can paraphrase fluently. Yelp’s content does not paraphrase well; a trade journal feature does.<\/p>\n

This has uncomfortable implications for any agency selling citation building as a primary lever for AI visibility. The most aggressive interpretation \u2014 that traditional citations no longer move the needle inside LLM-mediated discovery \u2014 overstates the case, because parametric memory does retain entity associations from large directories with deep historical web presence. But the moderate interpretation, that the marginal return on a 150th directory listing is essentially zero for LLM purposes, is well supported by the data and difficult to argue against.<\/p>\n

The Real Sources LLMs Pull From<\/h2>\n

If the source distribution above is approximately correct, the practical question becomes: where should attention go instead? The answer is unromantic. LLMs concentrate citation weight on a small number of source classes that share a common feature \u2014 they produce text that other text links to, quotes, and elaborates on. That is, they sit at the centre of the open-web citation graph, not at its periphery.<\/p>\n

Editorial Content and Trade Publications<\/h3>\n

Trade publications are the single most under-appreciated channel in current AI visibility planning. Construction Dive, Modern Healthcare, Restaurant Business, Supply Chain Dive, The Drum, AdExchanger, Law360, and their hundreds of vertical equivalents publish the kind of long-form, named-source journalism that LLMs cite heavily when asked sector-specific questions. A single feature in a trade outlet that names a company in context \u2014 describing what it does, who its customers are, and why it is notable \u2014 typically produces more LLM citation surface than fifty new directory listings<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The reason is structural. Trade publications are linked from other trade publications, from analyst reports, and from Wikipedia (which often draws on trade press for its company articles). They appear in pre-training corpora at high density because they are text-rich and crawler-friendly. And their content carries narrative context \u2014 the kind of “this company does X for clients of type Y in market Z” framing that LLMs can paraphrase into useful answers. A directory entry, no matter how well-formatted, simply does not produce that kind of contextual prose.<\/p>\n

Practitioners working in regulated industries have an additional lever here. Regulator news pages, association journals, and standards-body announcements all behave like trade publications from an LLM citation standpoint, with the added benefit of being treated as authoritative for compliance-adjacent queries.<\/p>\n

Reddit Threads and Community Forums<\/h3>\n

The 2024 licensing deal between Reddit and Google, and the parallel ingestion of Reddit content into OpenAI’s training pipeline, materially changed the citation surface. Reddit threads now appear in LLM outputs at frequencies that would have been implausible two years ago. The pattern is most visible in product comparison and service-recommendation queries, where Perplexity in particular surfaces Reddit threads as primary sources at rates approaching fifteen percent of total citations.<\/p>\n

This creates a tension that the orthodoxy is poorly equipped to handle. Reddit cannot be “managed” in the way a directory listing can. Attempts to seed threads or astroturf recommendations are detectable, often punished, and ethically suspect. The honest play is to participate authentically in subreddits where one’s customers congregate, build a genuine reputation, and accept that the resulting citations are downstream consequences of being useful in those communities rather than direct outputs of a marketing<\/a> process. That is a difficult sell to a CMO accustomed to dashboards, but it reflects the actual mechanism.<\/p>\n

A 2026 Harvard Business Review piece on LLM-generated advice \u2014 which coined the term “trendslop” to describe the polished but potentially unreliable outputs LLMs produce when asked open-ended business questions \u2014 implicitly highlights why community sources matter. The same models that produce trendslop on abstract strategy questions perform better on concrete recommendation queries when grounded in authentic user discussion. Reddit, Stack Exchange, specialist forums, and to a lesser extent Quora supply that grounding.<\/p>\n

Branded Sites With Structured Data<\/h3>\n

Owned-property optimisation has always been part of SEO, but its weighting in an LLM context is higher than in classic local SEO. Three properties of a well-built brand site increase LLM citation likelihood: comprehensive schema markup<\/a> (Organization, LocalBusiness, Service, Product, FAQ, and HowTo schemas in particular), text-first content that explains what the business does in unambiguous prose, and clean technical infrastructure that retrieval-layer crawlers can parse without rendering JavaScript.<\/p>\n

The structured-data point deserves emphasis because it is widely misunderstood. LLMs do not “read” schema markup the way Google’s knowledge graph does. But the retrieval layers that sit between the model and the live web do, and the search APIs that supply snippets to those layers prioritise pages with strong structured<\/a> signals. Schema therefore acts as an indirect factor \u2014 not a direct input to the model, but a factor in whether the model’s retrieval layer surfaces the page in the first place.<\/p>\n

For mid-market businesses, the practical implication is to invest in a comprehensive set of well-written service and location pages, each marked up with appropriate schema, before spending another pound on directory submissions. The marginal return on the former substantially exceeds the latter at virtually every budget level above the smallest local operator.<\/p>\n

Industry-Specific Aggregators<\/h3>\n

There is a meaningful distinction between generic directories \u2014 which aggregate everything from plumbers to law<\/a> firms with no editorial filter \u2014 and industry-specific aggregators that curate within a vertical. Capterra and G2 in software<\/a>, Clutch and DesignRush in professional services, Houzz in home improvement, Avvo and Justia in legal, Healthgrades and Vitals in medical, and a long list of vertical equivalents in every major sector. These platforms behave more like trade publications than like generic directories from an LLM citation standpoint, because they combine editorial structure with depth of content per entity.<\/p>\n

A recent analysis<\/a> highlighted that curated, editorially moderated listing environments tend to produce stronger downstream signals than open-submission catalogues, and the LLM citation data largely supports that pattern. The mechanism is the same one that elevates trade publications: depth of context per listed entity, consistent linking from related editorial content, and a higher probability of being quoted or paraphrased in pre-training data.<\/p>\n

The practitioner takeaway is that not all directories are equivalent, and lumping them together \u2014 as most citation-coverage tools still do \u2014 produces a misleading picture of authority. A single listing in the appropriate vertical aggregator typically outperforms ten listings in generic directories, both for traditional local SEO and, more pronouncedly, for LLM visibility.<\/p>\n

Honest Counterarguments Worth Addressing<\/h2>\n

The argument so far has been one-directional, and intellectual honesty requires engaging with the strongest objections. Several survive scrutiny in modified form, and a credible framework has to accommodate them rather than dismiss them.<\/p>\n

Local Pack Queries Still Matter<\/h3>\n

The first and most important counterargument is that LLM-mediated discovery, however quickly it is growing, is not yet the dominant channel for local commercial intent. Google’s local pack \u2014 the three-result map module that appears for queries with local intent \u2014 still drives the majority of click-through behaviour for service businesses, and the local pack remains demonstrably influenced by traditional citation signals.<\/p>\n

This is true and material. A plumber in Birmingham who reallocates the entirety of their citation budget to trade press placements and Reddit participation would, in the short term, lose visibility in the very surface that produces most of their phone calls. The local pack continues to weight Google Business Profile completeness, review volume and recency, and proximity. Citations on the major aggregators still feed into the entity reconciliation that underpins the pack.<\/p>\n

The honest framing is that the two surfaces \u2014 local pack and LLM output \u2014 overlap partially but not fully, and the optimal allocation depends on the share of actual revenue that each channel produces for a given business. For a high-volume local service operator, the local pack remains the priority, and citations directed at the major aggregators remain defensible. For a B2B services firm whose buyers research extensively before contacting vendors, LLM visibility likely already exceeds local pack visibility in revenue impact, and the allocation should shift accordingly.<\/p>\n

NAP Consistency as Trust Signal<\/h3>\n

The second counterargument concerns NAP (name, address, phone number) consistency. Even if a particular directory contributes little to LLM outputs directly, inconsistent business information across the web creates entity-resolution problems that propagate into both traditional search and AI-mediated discovery. An LLM that encounters three different phone numbers for the same business across its training corpus is more likely to hallucinate, omit, or hedge when asked about that business.<\/p>\n

This argument is sound and points to a useful refinement. The value of citation work is not zero; it is that the value lies in entity disambiguation rather than in citation count. A business with clean, consistent data across a small number of high-authority sources is better positioned than one with scattered, conflicting data across a large number of low-authority sources. The implication is to consolidate, not to expand \u2014 to fix the major aggregators and the vertical-relevant sources, then stop, rather than to chase coverage scores into the long tail.<\/p>\n

MIT Sloan’s warning about “persuasion bombing” \u2014 the phenomenon in which LLMs deliver inaccurate information convincingly \u2014 has a quiet corollary. Inconsistent source data is one of the conditions under which persuasion-bombed outputs arise. A business that allows conflicting NAP data to persist across the web is, in effect, providing the raw material for confidently wrong AI answers about itself.<\/p>\n

Long-Tail Niche Directories<\/h3>\n

The third counterargument is that long-tail, niche directories \u2014 the kind that aggregate, say, certified arborists in the Pacific Northwest, or independent bookbinders in the UK \u2014 perform a function that generic directories do not. They serve as authoritative references within tight communities and are often cited by trade publications and editorial content within those niches. An LLM asked about a narrow vertical may surface a niche directory directly, or surface an article that cites one.<\/p>\n

This is correct and is the basis for one of the few defensible directory-investment cases that survives the broader critique. The specific niche directories that pass the test are those with editorial selection, depth of profile content per listed entity, and demonstrable inbound links from trade press or association sources. Most generic submission directories fail all three tests; a small number of niche-specific resources<\/a> pass all three. The question is one of selection, not volume.<\/p>\n

For practitioners trying to evaluate a specific directory, this resource<\/a> outlines the editorial criteria that distinguish curated environments from open-submission catalogues, and the same criteria translate reasonably well into a heuristic for predicting LLM citation likelihood. A directory that an editor would describe and link to in a trade article is a directory worth being listed in. A directory that exists purely to serve SEO purposes is not.<\/p>\n

A Framework for Allocating Citation Budget<\/h2>\n

The cumulative argument points toward a different allocation pattern than the one most agencies still recommend. The framework below is not a prescription; it is a decision structure that practitioners can adapt to their specific situation. The goal is to make the trade-offs explicit rather than to default to a coverage-maximising strategy that no longer matches the underlying mechanism.<\/p>\n

The first input is the channel mix. A business should know, at least approximately, what share of revenue arrives via local pack, organic search, paid search, AI-mediated discovery, referral, and direct. The relative weighting of citation tactics should mirror the relative weighting of those channels in revenue impact, not in tradition.<\/p>\n

The second input is the entity-resolution baseline. Before any expansion, the existing footprint should be audited for inconsistencies in name, address, phone, website URL, and business category. Inconsistencies should be resolved across the major aggregators (Google Business Profile, Bing Places, Apple Business Connect, Facebook, and the four major data aggregators that feed downstream surfaces). This is the floor below which no amount of additional activity compensates.<\/p>\n

The third input is the vertical map. For any given industry<\/a>, there is a small number of trade publications, vertical aggregators, association resources, and community forums that disproportionately influence both human research and LLM citation. Identifying these \u2014 typically ten to twenty sources for a mid-market business \u2014 produces a concentrated target list that is far smaller and far more valuable than the typical 150-source citation audit.<\/p>\n

The fourth input is the content surface. The owned property must support the kind of contextual prose that LLMs paraphrase. That means service pages with substantive descriptions, location pages with genuine local context, an about section that explains the business clearly, and schema markup applied consistently. Without this, external mentions have nowhere to anchor.<\/p>\n

Table 2 summarises the practical allocation pattern that emerges when these inputs are applied to a representative mid-market business with mixed local and B2B revenue. The percentages refer to share of total citation-and-mention budget, not absolute spend.<\/p>\n

Table 2: Suggested budget allocation across citation and mention categories for a mixed-revenue mid-market business<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Category<\/th>\nLegacy allocation<\/th>\nRecommended allocation<\/th>\nPrimary rationale<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Major aggregators (GBP, Bing, Apple, Facebook)<\/td>\n15%<\/td>\n20%<\/td>\nEntity resolution floor; local pack input<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Data aggregators (Data Axle, Neustar, Foursquare)<\/td>\n20%<\/td>\n10%<\/td>\nDiminished but non-zero downstream value<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Generic directories (volume coverage)<\/td>\n30%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\nMarginal LLM contribution; reputation hygiene only<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Vertical aggregators (Capterra, G2, Clutch, Houzz, etc.)<\/td>\n10%<\/td>\n15%<\/td>\nHigh citation-graph centrality within sector<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Trade publication earned mentions<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n20%<\/td>\nHighest LLM citation density; durable authority<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Reddit and community participation<\/td>\n0%<\/td>\n10%<\/td>\nRising citation share, particularly in Perplexity<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Wikipedia presence and notability work<\/td>\n0%<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\nOutsized parametric weight where eligible<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Owned-property content and schema<\/td>\n15%<\/td>\n10%<\/td>\nAnchor surface for all external mentions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Review acquisition and management<\/td>\n5%<\/td>\n3%<\/td>\nLocal pack input; modest LLM contribution<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Niche association and standards bodies<\/td>\n0%<\/td>\n2%<\/td>\nTrust signal in regulated verticals<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Long-tail directory submissions<\/td>\n0%<\/td>\n0%<\/td>\nNo defensible mechanism of return<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The figures presented in Table 2 confirm the structural shift the argument has been building toward. The largest single increases sit in trade publication earned mentions and community participation \u2014 categories that demand different organisational capabilities than directory submission and that resist the kind of linear-scaling automation agencies have built around citation work. The largest decrease sits in generic directories, where the recommended allocation collapses from thirty percent to five.<\/p>\n

Choosing Directories vs. Earned Mentions<\/h3>\n

The choice between directory listings and earned mentions is not binary, and framing it as such oversimplifies the decision. The honest framing is that they are different instruments with different cost structures, different time horizons, and different risk profiles, and that a sensible portfolio includes both in proportions that depend on the business’s specific situation.<\/p>\n

Directory listings \u2014 particularly in the major aggregators and a small set of vertical-relevant sources \u2014 are cheap, fast, and predictable. The work is bounded, the outcome is verifiable, and the entity-resolution benefit is real. Earned mentions in trade publications and community forums are expensive, slow, and unpredictable. They require either in-house PR capability or external relationships, they take months to materialise, and they cannot be guaranteed. But their citation density inside LLM outputs is several multiples higher, and their durability is greater because they are linked, archived, and quoted in ways that compound over time.<\/p>\n

For a business with limited budget, the rational starting point is to fix the entity-resolution floor first (the major aggregators, properly maintained) and then to allocate the remainder to the highest-leverage earned-mention category for that vertical. For a business with substantial budget, the allocation can be more diversified, but the principle holds: the marginal pound spent on the 51st directory listing is worth less than the marginal pound spent on a single trade publication relationship.<\/p>\n

Deloitte’s analysis of AI agent architecture<\/a> argues that effective deployment of these systems requires documenting reasoning chains and keeping knowledgeable humans in the loop. The same governance instinct applies to citation strategy. A practitioner who cannot articulate why a specific directory listing is expected to influence a specific outcome is operating on inertia, not analysis. The framework above is intended to force that articulation: every line item should have a stated mechanism of return, and any line item without one should be cut.<\/p>\n

One reflective note from years of audit work: the businesses that perform best in LLM-mediated discovery are almost never the ones with the largest citation footprints. They are the ones with the clearest narrative \u2014 a recognisable position in their market, a body of editorial coverage that explains what they do and why it matters, and a community presence that produces authentic third-party endorsement. Those properties are difficult to reduce to a checklist, which is precisely why they remain undervalued by the orthodoxy.<\/p>\n

The OECD’s 2022 paper on measuring the value of data and data flows made a related point in a different context: high-frequency private-sector data combined with structured public sources reveals patterns that neither can produce alone. The same combinatorial logic applies to citation strategy. A clean entity foundation in the major aggregators, combined with editorial depth in trade press and authentic community presence, produces an information environment in which LLMs can describe a business accurately and favourably. Any single component in isolation is insufficient.<\/p>\n

The Harvard Business Review research on “trendslop” \u2014 the polished but unreliable advice LLMs produce when prompted on open-ended business questions \u2014 has an instructive parallel. Just as LLM advice degrades when the model has insufficient grounding in specific, verifiable evidence, LLM business descriptions degrade when the underlying source environment is thin or contradictory. The fix in both cases is the same: improve the evidentiary substrate, and the outputs improve correspondingly.<\/p>\n

Statista’s overview of large language models, the MIT Sloan executive primer, and the Harvard Business Review pieces on LLM-powered search converge on a common observation that has not yet permeated local SEO practice: these systems are pattern-completion engines operating over the textual record of the open web, and their outputs reflect the structure and density of that record. A business that wants to be described accurately and favourably by an LLM must invest in being part of the textual record in ways that support pattern-completion \u2014 long-form, contextually rich, linked from authoritative sources, consistent across appearances. Generic directory listings do not contribute to that record in any meaningful way.<\/p>\n

The challenge for any practitioner reading this is concrete and uncomfortable. Pull the last twelve months of citation-and-mention spend for a representative client. Categorise each line item against the framework above. For each item, write down \u2014 in a sentence \u2014 the specific mechanism by which it is expected to influence either a local pack ranking, an organic search position, or an LLM citation. If the sentence cannot be written without resorting to vague references to “authority” or “trust”, the item is probably not earning its place. Then ask the harder question: what would the allocation look like if the budget were rebuilt from scratch with the current source distribution in mind, rather than the 2018 one. The gap between the actual allocation and the reconstructed one is the measure of how much inertia is shaping the work, and closing that gap is the most valuable thing a citation strategy can do this year.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make discovery efficient for end users and to confer a degree of editorial legitimacy on the businesses listed. Statista’s overview of large language models defines an LLM as a “computational model whose aim […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":29112,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[728,737],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-29051","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-business","8":"category-directories"},"yoast_head":"\nPatterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Jasmine Business Directory\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jasminedirectory\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/robert.gombos\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-19T07:33:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-05-19T07:45:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1280\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"720\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Gombos Atila Robert\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@jasminedir\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@jasminedir\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Gombos Atila Robert\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/088f91f4a09b0333a72c29560bcb6486\"},\"headline\":\"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-19T07:33:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-19T07:45:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4830,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Business\",\"Directories\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/\",\"name\":\"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-19T07:33:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-19T07:45:10+00:00\",\"description\":\"A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg\",\"width\":1280,\"height\":720},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Blog\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Jasmine's Business Directory Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Jasmine Business Directory\",\"alternateName\":\"Jasmine Directory\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/05\\\/Jasmine-directory-logo-official.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/05\\\/Jasmine-directory-logo-official.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Jasmine Business Directory\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/jasminedirectory\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/jasminedir\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/jasminedirectory\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.pinterest.com\\\/jasminedir\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/en.wikipedia.org\\\/wiki\\\/Jasmine_Directory\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.crunchbase.com\\\/organization\\\/jasmine-directory\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/088f91f4a09b0333a72c29560bcb6486\",\"name\":\"Gombos Atila Robert\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/litespeed\\\/avatar\\\/cfc93b692b3469fdbcf2be9b45c0355e.jpg?ver=1778912162\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/litespeed\\\/avatar\\\/cfc93b692b3469fdbcf2be9b45c0355e.jpg?ver=1778912162\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jasminedirectory.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/litespeed\\\/avatar\\\/cfc93b692b3469fdbcf2be9b45c0355e.jpg?ver=1778912162\",\"caption\":\"Gombos Atila Robert\"},\"description\":\"Gombos Atila Robert brings over 15 years of specialized experience in marketing, particularly within the software and Internet sectors. His academic background is equally robust, as he holds Bachelor\u2019s and Master\u2019s degrees in relevant fields, along with a Doctorate in Visual Arts.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atilagombos.com\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/robert.gombos\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/jasmine.directory\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/in\\\/robertgombos\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/en.wikipedia.org\\\/wiki\\\/Jasmine_Directory\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data","description":"A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data","og_description":"A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make","og_url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/","og_site_name":"Jasmine Business Directory","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jasminedirectory\/","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/robert.gombos\/","article_published_time":"2026-05-19T07:33:36+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-05-19T07:45:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1280,"height":720,"url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Gombos Atila Robert","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@jasminedir","twitter_site":"@jasminedir","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/"},"author":{"name":"Gombos Atila Robert","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/088f91f4a09b0333a72c29560bcb6486"},"headline":"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data","datePublished":"2026-05-19T07:33:36+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-19T07:45:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/"},"wordCount":4830,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg","articleSection":["Business","Directories"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/","url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/","name":"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg","datePublished":"2026-05-19T07:33:36+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-19T07:45:10+00:00","description":"A business directory, in its classical sense, is a curated index of commercial entities organised by category, geography, or trade, designed to make","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Business-Directory-May-2026-27.jpg","width":1280,"height":720},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/patterns-in-how-llms-reference-business-directory-data\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Blog","item":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Patterns in How LLMs Reference Business Directory Data"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/","name":"Jasmine's Business Directory Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Jasmine Business Directory","alternateName":"Jasmine Directory","url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Jasmine-directory-logo-official.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Jasmine-directory-logo-official.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Jasmine Business Directory"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jasminedirectory\/","https:\/\/x.com\/jasminedir","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/jasminedirectory\/","https:\/\/www.pinterest.com\/jasminedir\/","https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Jasmine_Directory","https:\/\/www.crunchbase.com\/organization\/jasmine-directory"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/088f91f4a09b0333a72c29560bcb6486","name":"Gombos Atila Robert","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/litespeed\/avatar\/cfc93b692b3469fdbcf2be9b45c0355e.jpg?ver=1778912162","url":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/litespeed\/avatar\/cfc93b692b3469fdbcf2be9b45c0355e.jpg?ver=1778912162","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-content\/litespeed\/avatar\/cfc93b692b3469fdbcf2be9b45c0355e.jpg?ver=1778912162","caption":"Gombos Atila Robert"},"description":"Gombos Atila Robert brings over 15 years of specialized experience in marketing, particularly within the software and Internet sectors. His academic background is equally robust, as he holds Bachelor\u2019s and Master\u2019s degrees in relevant fields, along with a Doctorate in Visual Arts.","sameAs":["https:\/\/atilagombos.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/robert.gombos\/","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/jasmine.directory\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/robertgombos\/","https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Jasmine_Directory"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29051","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29051"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29051\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/29112"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29051"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29051"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jasminedirectory.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29051"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}