The useful finding was a contradiction.
Our public-source look compared the website with the descriptions made available to assistants. Prices, scope and location details appeared differently across those surfaces.
The useful next step was to bring those descriptions together. The work did not need an invented growth figure to be worth doing.
The reading had a boundary.
Public sources did not establish what the business earned, how much founder time it used, or whether a customer received a free look on time.
An unaided assistant recall was one response under one condition. It did not prove that the company was invisible in search or to other assistants.
What we changed next.
We prepared clearer whole-business copy and a shared set of facts for the pages and machine-readable descriptions. The draft is still subject to review.
The next useful evidence is what people and assistants understand from it, followed by actual requests and delivery. A locally passing page is a working draft, not a business result.
A few useful answers.
Does a free look measure search visibility?
A public-source review can report specific observations. Search performance needs the business’s own reporting data, and assistant-answer samples need their method and limits stated.
Does a working form prove the service was delivered?
No. A form acknowledgement can establish that a request was saved. Delivery needs a separate read-back of the document reaching the requester.