Growth & Findability Plan

Three years of consistent social, content and trade-press work have produced a real asset. Understanding its shape is what makes the next phase possible.

What is working

• LinkedIn engagement is strong. 6.0% in June 2026, with the best posts reaching 11.6%. Most B2B company pages sit well below this.
• Organic growth is steady. 714 followers in June 2023 to 1,134 today, with no paid support at any point.
• Earned media is landing consistently. 319 lifetime placements. Whole Foods Magazine, Nutraceutical Business Review, Nutraceuticals World, Nutrition Industry Executive and Food Ingredients First have all published BLS in the last two years, reaching a combined audience of 1.8 million since August 2024.
• Expert-led content outperforms everything else. The post announcing Dr. Crabtree's SupplySide session drew 569 impressions and 25 link clicks — more than double the click count of any other post in the dataset.
• Organic search is the quality channel. It delivers 45% of sessions and, more tellingly, 29 of 44 sample requests. Organic visitors convert deeper than any other source.
• Nearly half the LinkedIn audience is in the right industries. Pharmaceuticals, health and wellness, biotechnology, food and beverage, food production, chemicals and cosmetics together account for 44%.

Where the headroom is

The new reporting shows exactly where effort converts into audience composition. These are not failures of past work — nobody could steer toward a target that was not visible. They are the specific levers now available.

A formulator evaluating NAD+ ingredients increasingly asks an assistant before opening a browser. Whether BLS appears in that answer is now a distinct discipline — and one where BLS starts from an unusually strong position, largely because of work already being done.

It is already happening

GA4 now classifies an AI Assistant channel group, and BLS has recorded sessions from it. The numbers are small — nine in the last twelve months — but they are not zero, and they represent people who reached the site because an assistant pointed them there. That is a baseline, already collecting, measurable from today.

Earned media is the strongest AI asset BLS has

This deserves emphasis, because it reframes what the PR programme is worth.

AI systems answering a question about ingredients do not primarily surface what a company says about itself. They surface what independent, authoritative sources say. Retrieval favours corroboration — a claim appearing in Nutraceuticals World and Whole Foods Magazine and Nutrition Industry Executive carries weight that the same claim on a company's own site does not.

BLS has 319 lifetime placements across exactly those publications. Every one is a third-party source associating the BLS name with D-ribose, NAD+, GRAS status, clinical evidence and healthy aging. That body of coverage does findability work continuously, and it compounds.

What else AI retrieval rewards

The inventory BLS can be cited for

• The only patented, FDA GRAS-certified D-Ribose on the market
• Two US patents for AMPK-activating nutraceutical technology
• RiaGev as the first ingredient shown to raise NAD+, ATP and glutathione simultaneously
• Non-GMO Project Verified, GRAS, Halal, Kosher, gluten-free
• Stability to 375°F and solubility without texture impact
• Published clinical data behind each core claim

Third-party listings are doing discovery BLS does not control

Ingredient marketplaces — Knowde, Ingredients Network, UL Prospector and distributor sites — carry BLS product detail and rank well on formulator queries. Formulators use them as a starting point, and AI assistants retrieve from them. Claiming and fully building out those profiles is low-effort visibility on platforms the target audience already searches.

Priority moves

• Convert spec sheets and clinical summaries from PDF to structured HTML pages
• Publish the comparison content the messaging already implies — RiaGev against NR and NMN, Bioenergy Ribose against generic D-ribose, SweetR against conventional sugar reduction
• Add Product, Organization, FAQPage and Dataset schema markup
• Build a technical FAQ from the questions formulators actually ask about solubility, dose, stability, format compatibility and regulatory status
• Claim and complete the ingredient marketplace profiles
• Stand up AI visibility tracking so inclusion is measured rather than assumed

18,886 sessions over the last twelve months produced 224 recorded conversions — 162 contact form submissions and 62 sample requests. A 1.19% conversion rate. The traffic is arriving; the path to action is thin.

Where conversions actually happen

The pattern is clear: the pages that explain the science are not the pages that capture intent. A formulator lands on a product page, reads the technical detail, and then has to navigate elsewhere to act. Every product page should carry a persistent path to a sample request and to the specification documentation.

Conversions also run 90% desktop — 189 of 210. That is consistent with a formulator researching at a workstation, and probably genuine. Worth pressure-testing the mobile product and sample flow before assuming it is purely behavioural.

Search position

Search Console has only recently been verified on the correct property, so the baseline is thin — 35 days, 529 clicks against 24,213 impressions. Adding a Domain property is the first task in the plan, because organic is already the highest-quality channel and there is currently almost no history to work from.

A formulator who is convinced needs somewhere better to land than a general contact form. The questions they arrive with are technical and consistent, which makes them easy to structure — and structuring them turns an enquiry into a qualified conversation.

Start with the form

A short, well-designed formulation brief is faster to build than an AI assistant, carries no regulatory exposure, and immediately produces better-qualified leads. Build it first; the assistant can layer on later.

Five of the six are single clicks. The whole form takes under a minute, and every answer is a qualifying field that routes the enquiry and arms whoever responds.

What the landing page carries

• A headline naming the formulator's problem, not the company's capability. Formulating with NAD+ and running into format limits? lands better than Total Solution Provider.
• The form high on the page. Someone arriving from a technical search is already qualified — do not make them scroll past a company story.
• Three proof blocks: clinical evidence, regulatory status, format flexibility. Short, specific, linked to full documentation.
• A named human who responds. Naming the technical contact converts better than a generic promise, and it matches how this industry works.
• Direct links to technical documentation — ungated. The gate is the form for people who want a conversation, not the spec sheet for people doing research. Gating specs suppresses exactly the AI and search visibility described in §02.

Connect it to Salesforce

Every qualifying answer should land in Salesforce as a structured field on the lead record, with source and campaign preserved. That closes the loop currently missing from all reporting: which marketing activity produced which qualified lead, and what happened to it afterwards.

The practical effect is significant. Reporting stops at lead volume today. With the Salesforce connection it can report pipeline — which converts every metric in this plan from an activity measure into a business measure.

The strongest channel BLS has, and the one that feeds AI findability most directly. The programme runs on a modest budget; the goal this year is to ramp it up steadily rather than rebuild it.

Where it stands

319 lifetime placements. 41 since August 2024, reaching a combined audience of 1.8 million. Whole Foods Magazine, Nutraceutical Business Review, Nutraceuticals World, Nutrition Industry Executive and Food Ingredients First are all publishing BLS regularly. Placement volume ran at 25 in 2025 and is tracking lower this year — a budget constraint, not a relationship problem.

Two developments worth protecting

• Coverage no longer requires a link. Removing that condition from the pitch is the right call. It lowers friction, it respects how editorial decisions actually get made, and — per §02 — the mention itself carries real findability value. We continue working links and key messages into coverage where the story supports them. Neither is something that can be required, and treating them as requirements would cost placements.
• Consumer media is now open. A meaningful expansion. Consumer publications reach far larger audiences, they carry weight in AI retrieval, and coverage there supports the finished-product brands that formulate with BLS ingredients — directly aligned with the stated mission of supporting customers' marketing and promotions. Worth protecting and building on.

Ramping up

• Move from reactive quotes toward a planned contributed-article calendar, at a pace the budget supports
• Pitch the comparison arguments as bylined technical pieces — the same content that serves §02
• Build employee advocacy around Dr. Crabtree and the technical bench; their reach compounds the company page's and their credibility travels further
• Give every placement a second life: a summary page on the site, a LinkedIn post from a named expert, an email to the list, a slide in the sales deck
• Track placements in the reporting stack alongside owned channels so earned media is visible in the same view as everything else

Roughly 4,170 opted-in contacts — this is the tight market, already captured — receiving about nine sends a year, several of them trade show announcements.

• The list is shrinking. It peaked at 5,134 in January 2025 and sits at 4,170. Natural attrition with no acquisition mechanism behind it.
• Performance is invisible. The current feed pulls campaign metadata — name, subject, recipient count — but no opens, clicks or unsubscribes. Extending the connector to the campaign summary endpoint fixes this.
• Links are not tagged. Email shows three sessions in GA4 across twelve months against roughly 40,000 delivered emails. That is a tracking gap, not an engagement result. UTM discipline on every email link resolves it.

Move to a monthly cadence with two tracks — technical and brand-marketing — matching the split the positioning documents already make. Feed the list deliberately from dossier downloads, trade show badge scans and webinar registrations.

Robin holding both writing and regulatory matters more than it might appear. Every comparison claim in §02, and every answer an AI assistant might give, needs a defensible regulatory position behind it. Having that judgement inside the writing function rather than as a downstream approval step is a structural advantage.

A plan only works if it becomes a routine. This is the schedule the programme runs on — designed to be sustainable rather than heroic, and to hold through the quiet months between trade shows.

Measured against the August 2026 baseline. Several metrics have no baseline yet — establishing them is the first month's work, and they are marked rather than guessed.

• Salesforce access and scope. Which objects, which fields, who owns the integration on the BLS side.
• The qualification bar. A qualified inquiry needs a definition BLS sales will accept — minimum volume, category fit, stage.
• Claim boundaries for the AI assistant. Structure–function language carries regulatory exposure. Robin and BLS regulatory should define the boundary before build.
• Gated or ungated technical documentation. The recommendation is ungated, because gating suppresses the AI and search visibility the plan depends on.
• Content capacity for twelve posts a month. Whether that sits with Sydney, with MRA, or splits — and what the approval path looks like at that volume.
• PR budget for the year. The ramp-up pace in §05 scales directly with it.
• China. Roughly 19% of geo-tagged LinkedIn followers. Whether that is a market to serve or context to filter changes both targeting and reporting.
• Tooling budget. AI visibility tracking, rank tracking and mention monitoring are recurring monthly costs, typically priced per domain.