Admitted to a ranking on documented work, outside the top three for every question it appears in. None of its 3 documented work claims comes from an independent source.
Best position #31 SEO for Lead Generation in New York, of 41 · also in 1 more ranking
Why: Rated from the evidence on file (sources, independence, confirmed quotes), not by an editor.
Opens in your own account with a ready question and a link to the same data. Nothing about you is sent.
- 33% written in the last 12 months
- 33% rate it 3 stars or lower
Clients most often value improved Google visibility, lead generation, communication, and transparent strategies. One reviewer says they spent thousands without results, so the feedback is mostly positive but not consistent across all reviews.More
- Personal and generous support2
- Improved Google rankings and visibility1
- Transparent strategies1
- Communication1
- Lead generation value and meeting agreed metrics1
“He is personable and obliging with his time.”
Show 4 more quotesHide quotes
“We are now on page one of Google, ranking in the second position for our keyword.”
“transparent strategies”
“outstanding communication”
“added significant value to our lead generation activity”
- No results despite substantial spend1
“Wasted thousands of dollars on them without any results at all.”
- Improving Google rankings1
- Lead generation1
Show 1 named client quoteHide named client quotes
“David and his company Primary Position have added significant value to our lead generation activity in 2012 and he has met and exceeded all the metrics set out in advance of our engagement. He is personable and obliging with his time. KEMP are very happy to continue the partnership into 2013”
- Your business matches the client types on file (B2B companies, B2C brands) and the industries on file (saas, fintech, healthcare).
- You need what reviewers hired it for: Improving Google rankings (1 of 2 mentions); Lead generation (1).
- Read the criticism first: "No results despite substantial spend" (1 of 3 reviews read).
- You need a published price before the first call: nothing is disclosed.
No documented work claim comes from an independent source yet.
- None of the 3 documented work claims comes from an independent source; all are the agency's own account or sources it controls.
- Little outside recognition on file: fewer than two awards, certifications or press mentions with a source.
- Ask for the hourly rate, minimum term, setup fee: not published.
- Ask for a SEO for Lead Generation case close to your business, with the result and the year it was measured.
- Ask for two client references you can call: no independent accounts of its work on file.
- #30 Geek in NY47Ranks above on this question#30#31 this oneScore4747Independent00PriceFrom $360/monthnot disclosedModerate confidence · own published cases · Not verified
- #32 SEO Guru NYC46Ranks below on this question#32#31 this oneScore4647Independent00Pricenot disclosednot disclosedModerate confidence · own published cases · Not verified
All detailsEverything behind the summary above: the same data the machine feed serves for Primary Position.Open ↓Close ↑
Score by criterion#31 SEO for Lead Generation in New York: 47/100
| Criterion | Weight | Points | Share | What it rests on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence for this query | 30 | 8 | 27% |
|
| Fit to this query | 25 | 19 | 76% |
|
| Capability depth | 15 | 11.3 | 75% |
|
| Reliability | 10 | 7.2 | 72% |
|
| Transparency | 10 | 2.5 | 25% |
|
| Reputation | 5 | 1.1 | 22% |
|
| Market credibilityweakest | 5 | 0 | 0% |
|
- -2 Profile below decision-ready status: the profile is collected but not reviewed yet.
All claims in the feed3 of 4 on file · 0 of 3 work claims from an independent source
Who says it, across all 4 claims on file: independent source 1 · linked to the agency 0 · listings the agency writes 0 · agency's own words 3. Independent share of work claims: 0%. 3 distinct source pages.
Claims per need in this feed: SEO Agencies with an In-house Team 2 · SEO for Lead Generation 1. The full ledger of 4 is on the proof page.
Primary Position lists Instabase, an AI document understanding platform, as a client case study described as AI Document Management with a $2 billion valuation.
Agency's own wordsprimaryposition.comclaimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed.quote confirmed, checked Nov 1, 2026describes workSEO Agencies with an In-house TeamQuote from the source page
AI Document Management, $2 Billion Valuation
Primary Position added significant value to KEMP's lead generation activity in 2012, meeting and exceeding all metrics set out in advance of the engagement. KEMP expressed happiness to continue the partnership into 2013.
Agency's own wordsprimaryposition.comclaimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed.quote confirmed, checked Nov 1, 2026describes work2012-2013SEO for Lead GenerationQuote from the source page
David and his company Primary Position have added significant value to our lead generation activity in 2012 and he has met and exceeded all the metrics set out in advance of our engagement. He is personable and obliging with his time. KEMP are very happy to continue the partnership into 2013
Primary Position lists Orb as a client in an entry labeled an AI Billing SEO case study.
Agency's own wordsprimaryposition.comclaimed: Recorded as the source states it; not independently confirmed.quote confirmed, checked Nov 2, 2026describes workSEO Agencies with an In-house TeamQuote from the source page
Orb - AI Billing SEO Case Study
Positions in every ranking2 rankings
2 positions: 2 where a claim on file names the need, 0 listed on offer only. The top 2 by evidence first; the rest open below.
| Ranking | Rank | Score | Claims for the need | Confidence | Weakest criterion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEO Agencies with an In-house Team · New Yorkon its own published cases | #34 of 35 | 47 | 2 (0 independent) | Moderate confidence | Market credibility 0 of 5 |
| SEO for Lead Generation · New Yorkon its own published cases | #31 of 41 | 47 | 1 (0 independent) | Moderate confidence | Market credibility 0 of 5 |
Fit and geography
- Headquarters
- New York, NY, USAAgency's own words
- Service regions
- New York, NY, USAVendar profile field
- Client types
- b2b, b2cVendar profile field
- Industries
- SaaS, Fintech, Healthcare, B2B, Technology, Finance, LawVendar profile field
- Named clients in confirmed proof
- Instabase, KEMP, OrbIndependent source or agency, see the claims list
Only rows marked “Verified by Vendar” were checked. Rankings place an agency in a city by headquarters or by documented work for clients there, never by a service region alone.
Pricing in fullNot disclosed
- Model
- not disclosed
- Minimum monthly budget
- not disclosed
- Project minimum
- not disclosed
- Hourly rate
- not disclosed
- Typical range
- not disclosed
- Minimum term
- not disclosed
- Setup fee
- not disclosed
- Engagement models
- not stated
Source: Not disclosed. Every figure above is the agency's published number; a row marked not disclosed has no published figure.
Median disclosed monthly floor in each ranking: SEO for Lead Generation $4,500 (23 of 41 disclose) · SEO Agencies with an In-house Team $5,000 (29 of 35 disclose)
Reputation
- Trustpilot3.7 · 3 reviews
How it counts: 3 third-party reviews at 3.7. Ratings say nothing about work on a specific need and never count as evidence for it.
- Awards
- none on file
- Certifications
- none on file
Company and process
- Founded
- 2005Agency's own words
- Team size
- 10Agency's own words
- Languages
- not statedVendar profile field
- Services
- SEOVendar profile field
- Technologies
- not statedVendar profile field
- Workflow
- not documentedAgency's own words
- Onboarding
- not documentedAgency's own words
- Reporting
- not documentedAgency's own words
Company fields come from the vendor profile; only fields with status verified were checked by Vendar.
How confidence is computedLower confidence
- Confidence
- Lower confidence, 62 of 100
- Evidence posture
- thin: No independent source documents this vendor's work; treat it as a candidate only.
- Capped by
- Rated from the evidence on file (sources, independence, confirmed quotes), not by an editor.
- Best position confidence
- Moderate confidence
It starts from the data completeness and source reliability of the profile, and is capped when independent proof of work is thin. The next level is Moderate confidence. One independent claim with a measured result for the best-ranked need is the fastest way up.
- Who the company is: website, headquarters, founding year, team size, logo, regions served20/20
- Fit: services, industries, client types15/15
- Commercial terms: model, entry price, hourly rate, minimum term, setup fee: model, entry price, hourly rate, minimum term, setup fee0/20
- Documented work: cases naming a client and a result (target 5) and work claims overall (target 10): 1 cases with a named client and a result, 3 work claims7/30
- Reputation: rating and review count on two or more platforms, each with 10 or more reviews: 0 platforms with a rating and 10 or more reviews; Trustpilot: too few reviews to count0/15
- Who is speaking: independent sources among work claims (full marks at 40%): 0 of 3 work claims are independent0/30
- Checked against the source page: confirmed, or half for partly confirmed: 3 confirmed, 0 partly, of 4 with a source19/25
- Numbers backed by a verbatim quote from the source: 1 of 120/20
- Seen within the last 365 days: 3 of 411/15
- Not contradicted: claims their source no longer supports: 0 not supported by their page10/10
These two scores describe the profile itself and never change a position.
Limits and how to correct them
- No independent source names SEO for lead generation work; the evidence is first-party or editorial.
- Pricing not disclosed; budget fit cannot be checked before outreach.
- Never verified against official sources.
- Profile below decision-ready status: the profile is collected but not reviewed yet.
- Use as a caveated candidate only: no independent source documents this vendor's work.
- None of the 3 documented work claims comes from an independent source; all are the agency's own account or sources it controls.
- Only one third-party evidence claim is normalized.
- Best position rests on: Published by the agency on its own site.
- 3 of 4 claims on file are the agency's own words or sources it controls; 1 come from an independent source.
- Open: Price signal disclosed (not disclosed; asked in Before you sign)
- Open: Three strongest proofs name a client and a measured, dated result (0 of 3)
- Open: Every claim has an observation date (3 of 4)
- Open: Strongest proofs are recent and delivered (2 of 3 within 3 years and with results in)
- Open: At least a third of documented work comes from independent sources (0 of 3 work claims)
Machine-readable version
This section carries the same data that AI assistants receive.
- Schema
- vendar.ai.vendor-summary.v1
- Model
- Evidence-weighted ranking 2026.11.7
- Data as of
- Nov 2, 2026
- Generated
- Verification
- Not verified
- Sources checked
- not yet
- Citation readiness
- Candidate only, with a caveat
- Do not infer headquarters from service-area coverage.
- Do not treat paid visibility as organic ranking proof.
- Do not present a source-thin profile as independently verified.
Describe what you need. The request is saved in Vendar first, then routed from there.