Proof
Verified at source, or not stated
Research and case files
Anyone can show you a number.
A percentage proves nothing
"+340% growth" with no starting figure is arithmetic theatre. Three bookings to ten is +233%.
A logo proves someone signed
A logo wall says a contract existed. It says nothing about what happened after the signature.
The work is the proof
What proves a firm can help you is watching it find the thing everyone else missed.
So here is the work, with the method attached — and where it is unfinished, the page says so, rather than waiting for a number that flatters us.
The file
One case, one study, one client. No borrowed statistics.
Every figure below traces to a dated scan or a live account we can produce on request. Nothing here is an industry benchmark wearing our name.
Case file 01 · Attribution
Both platforms said the campaigns were healthy. Both were wrong.
A client account we operate was optimizing against a conversion event that had quietly stopped meaning what it once meant. No dashboard could have shown it. Verified
No platform shows you the definition of your own conversion event — someone has to open the page and read the code that fires it. That is half an hour of work almost nobody does, and it is the whole diagnosis. The repair: rebuild the event, reset the learning, demote the polluted signal. This is now the first thing we check in any account we take on.
Study 02 · Twelve markets · Pre-registered
Does your map rank predict what the AI says about you?
Every guide written about AI visibility assumes an answer to this. None of them tested it. So we are testing it: twelve businesses, twelve unrelated trades, twelve cities, measured on Google Maps and inside the AI answer. The Maps half so far:
Eight of twelve markets measured, all eight on both channels. Nothing concluded.
In six of the eight, map standing and AI standing point in different directions. One business is absent from the map entirely and still named in more than a third of the AI answers; another owns 85.71% of its map and is named in 12.24%. In the remaining two the business is at or near zero on both. Not one of the eight shows the two channels moving together — which is the result that would have proved our central claim false, and we wrote that condition down before the first scan ran.
Eight is not twelve, so nothing is concluded and no correlation is calculated here. The four remaining markets have not been run. Every figure above is six weeks old at the time of writing and will be re-pulled before publication, because a stale figure is not a figure.
8 of 12 markets measured · all 8 complete on both channels · 4 not yet run · all scans dated 09 July 2026
We do not choose the businesses
The subject in each market is the first result the scanning tool returns for that trade in that city. Mechanical, reproducible by a stranger, and designed so we cannot pick the ones whose numbers flatter us.
The same grid every time
Forty-nine points, eight-mile radius, centred on the city. The keyword is the trade and the city, nothing more. Both channels, same day. Anonymized by trade and city.
The awkward results stay in
One subject turned out to be a service-area business with no storefront. Another appears at only eleven of forty-nine points. Neither was swapped for a tidier example.
We wrote down what would prove us wrong
If the twelve markets show the two channels moving together, our central claim is false, we publish that, and the line comes off the site. Recorded before any result was read.
Local Falcon · 7×7 grid · 8-mile radius · 09 July 2026 · anonymized by trade and city. Share of local voice counts only top-three placements — which is why a business can appear at 23 of 49 points and still score zero. Being seen and being chosen are different measurements, and most tools report only one of them.
File 03 · A client with a name
Not an initial. Not a stock photograph. A person.
"I spent months trying to work out where my business had broken. I never would have found the reason on my own — and it turned out to be something I had done myself."
Mark Eadie
The fault in his business was one he had introduced himself, and he could not see it from the inside. Nobody can. That is not a failing — it is a structural fact, and it is the entire argument for having someone outside the account go and read the code.
Start
The same scrutiny, pointed at your account.
Twenty-five minutes, free, and we will tell you straight what we can see from the outside. If it is worth going further, the Growth Diagnostic is the next step — and it credits in full against month one.
Or write to the principal: ryan@theorymediaco.com. Read in person, answered in person.