Public Lands AI Market Strategy Report - Outdoor Retail and Gear Marketplaces

Answer Capsule

Public Lands holds 5.8% valid recommendation coverage in the September 2026 LLM Authority Index benchmark for Outdoor Retail and Gear Marketplaces, up from 4.2% in August 2026. The brand is visible but under-recommended: it appears in 15.5% of qualified observations yet converts only 5.8% of them into a valid recommendation, and it ranks first in just 0.2% of observations. Its clearest win is the largest month-over-month coverage gain in the category, and its clearest gap is a rank-one rate of one single observation against REI's 16.9%. The clearest opportunity is converting its rising raw mention presence into shortlist placement inside the Brand Recommendation cluster.

Who This Report Is For

This report is for Public Lands marketing, ecommerce, and brand leadership, and for category teams at outdoor retail and gear marketplaces who need to understand how AI research surfaces are shaping retailer shortlists before a shopper ever reaches a search results page.

Report Card

Executive Summary

Public Lands recorded 5.8% valid recommendation coverage in September 2026, up from 4.2% in August 2026, the largest percentage-point gain of any tracked brand in the category. That gain came from 31 valid recommendations out of 534 qualified observations, compared with 22 out of 519 in August 2026. The benchmark classifies the move as within normal month-to-month variation, so the direction is encouraging but the magnitude is not yet a structural change.

The gap between visibility and recommendation is the defining feature of Public Lands' position. Raw mention presence reached 15.5% in September 2026, up from 13.3% in August 2026, while valid recommendation coverage reached only 5.8%. In practice, Public Lands is named in roughly one of every six qualified AI answers but is actually recommended in roughly one of every seventeen. That conversion gap is the central strategic problem in this report.

Sentiment framing is a genuine strength. Public Lands recorded 44 positive mentions, 39 neutral mentions, and zero negative mentions in September 2026, producing a net sentiment score of 0.5301. The brand is not being framed cautiously or as a comparison anchor. It is being described positively and then left off the shortlist.

The strongest platform signal is Google AI Overviews, where Public Lands reached 8.11% valid recommendation coverage and 5.41% top-three rate, the highest of any tracked platform for the brand. Google AI Mode is the largest single opportunity pool by observation volume, with 155 observations, and Public Lands reached 5.81% coverage there. Perplexity is the clearest platform gap: Public Lands recorded a single neutral mention across 69 observations and zero valid recommendations.

The weakest cluster position is structural rather than brand-specific. All 534 qualified observations in September 2026 fell into the Brand Recommendation cluster. The benchmark contains no qualified observations in Pricing & Value or Multi-Brand Comparison, so Public Lands' performance in price-led or head-to-head comparison prompts cannot be assessed from this dataset.

Against the category leader, the distance is wide. REI holds 32.8% valid recommendation coverage and a 16.9% rank-one rate. Public Lands holds 5.8% coverage and a 0.2% rank-one rate, representing one observation in the entire month. Public Lands is present in the category conversation but is almost never the first retailer an AI system names.

What Public Lands Is Winning

Questions This Section Answers

• Where did Public Lands post the largest valid recommendation coverage gain in the category?
• How strong is Public Lands' sentiment framing compared with other outdoor retailers?
• When Public Lands earns a recommendation, how well is it positioned?

Public Lands has three evidence-backed strengths in the September 2026 benchmark.

The first is momentum. Public Lands posted the largest valid recommendation coverage gain in the category, rising 1.6 points from 4.2% in August 2026 to 5.8% in September 2026. Its valid recommendation count rose from 22 to 31. No other tracked brand recorded a larger percentage-point increase.

The second is framing quality. With 44 positive mentions, 39 neutral mentions, and zero negative mentions, Public Lands carries a net sentiment score of 0.5301, above Bass Pro Shops at 0.3841, Cabela's at 0.3493, Scheels at 0.3460, and Academy Sports + Outdoors at 0.3164. Among brands with meaningful observation counts, only Sierra, evo, and CampSaver score higher, and all three operate at much smaller scale. Public Lands is being described well when it appears.

The third is top-three placement relative to its own coverage. Public Lands reached a 3.0% top-three rate on 5.8% valid recommendation coverage, meaning roughly half of its valid recommendations land inside the first three positions. Its average recommended rank is 3.0. When Public Lands earns a recommendation, it tends to earn a usable one.

These are real signals, but they are narrow. Public Lands holds 31 valid recommendations in a 534-observation month, and its rank-one count is a single observation. The wins describe a brand with a clean reputation and a small footprint, not a brand with recommendation power.

Where Public Lands Has the Clearest AI Visibility Gaps

Questions This Section Answers

• Why do most observations that mention Public Lands fail to convert into a valid recommendation?
• On which AI platforms does Public Lands have no recommendation presence?
• How wide is the rank-one gap between Public Lands and brands like REI, Bass Pro Shops, and Scheels?

The primary gap is recommendation conversion. Public Lands appears in 15.5% of qualified observations but earns a valid recommendation in only 5.8%. That means roughly 63% of the observations where Public Lands is mentioned do not convert into recommendation credit. The brand is being retrieved as context, referenced in passing, or listed without being positioned as a choice.

The secondary gap is first-position absence. Public Lands recorded one rank-one placement across 534 observations in September 2026, a 0.2% rank-one rate. REI recorded 90 rank-one placements at 16.9%. Bass Pro Shops recorded 11 at 2.1%. Scheels recorded 17 at 3.2%. Even brands with lower overall coverage than Public Lands, including evo at 4.5% coverage, are competing for first position at comparable or higher rates. Public Lands is not in that contest.

The third gap is platform concentration. Public Lands' recommendation coverage is carried almost entirely by Google AI Overviews and Google AI Mode. On Perplexity, Public Lands recorded one neutral mention across 69 observations and zero valid recommendations. On Copilot, Public Lands recorded 14 neutral mentions across 55 observations, zero positive mentions, and zero valid recommendations. On ChatGPT, Public Lands recorded five mentions, one valid recommendation, and a 1.39% coverage rate. Three of the six tracked platforms are effectively closed to the brand.

The fourth gap is competitive displacement. REI holds 32.8% coverage, 21.9% top-three rate, and 16.9% rank-one rate. Bass Pro Shops holds 21.0% coverage and 14.4% top-three rate. Cabela's holds 16.1% coverage. Backcountry holds 14.6% coverage and a 9.2% top-three rate. Public Lands sits eighth in the category by coverage, behind Scheels at 11.6%, Academy Sports + Outdoors at 10.7%, and Sierra at 10.7%. The brands immediately above Public Lands are not dramatically better known. They are simply being selected more often when the same prompts run.

Biggest Opportunity

Questions This Section Answers

• What single change would move Public Lands from a passing reference to a shortlisted retailer?
• Which Google surfaces already convert Public Lands mentions into recommendations?

The single clearest opportunity is converting Public Lands' existing raw mention presence into shortlist placement inside the Brand Recommendation cluster. Public Lands is already retrieved in 15.5% of qualified observations. The brand does not need to become more findable. It needs the answers that already mention it to position it as a recommended retailer rather than a passing reference.

The evidence points to a specific mechanism. Public Lands' strongest platform performance is on Google AI Overviews, where it reached 8.11% valid recommendation coverage and 5.41% top-three rate, and on Google AI Mode, where it reached 5.81% coverage across the largest observation pool in the benchmark at 155 observations. Those two surfaces are where the brand's public evidence layer is already being synthesized into recommendations. The same source and citation patterns that support recommendation on those surfaces are the most likely path to closing the gap on Perplexity, Copilot, and ChatGPT, where Public Lands currently has no recommendation presence at all.

The prompt examples in the dataset point to the same conclusion. Public Lands appears in the same prompt set as REI, Bass Pro Shops, and Cabela's, including discovery prompts such as "sporting goods store near me," "outdoor stores near me," "Where can I get a good quality backpack?", and "camping toilet." These are prompts where Public Lands is being retrieved alongside the category leaders. The opportunity is to make the brand's product, store, and category evidence strong enough that retrieval becomes recommendation.

Competitive Landscape

Questions This Section Answers

• Where does Public Lands rank by top-three rate and rank-one rate against the nine tracked competitors?
• How does Public Lands' average recommended rank and sentiment compare with REI and the other outdoor retailers?

REI holds dominant recommendation power in the Outdoor Retail and Gear Marketplaces category, with Bass Pro Shops as the strongest challenger and Cabela's, Backcountry, and Scheels forming a contested middle tier. Public Lands sits in the lower tier by coverage, but its September 2026 gain and its clean sentiment profile place it closer to the middle than its rank suggests.

Average recommended rank covers rank-eligible recommendations only.

Public Lands ranks seventh by top-three rate and eighth by rank-one rate, with a 3.00% top-three rate and a 0.19% rank-one rate. Its average recommended rank of 3.00 is the second-best in the table after REI's 1.54, and its sentiment score of 0.5301 is the third-highest among brands with meaningful observation counts. The numbers show a brand that is rarely recommended but is positioned well and framed positively when it is.

Prompt Evidence

Questions This Section Answers

• Which prompts show Public Lands earning recommendation credit, and on which surfaces?
• What do the prompt-level results reveal about Public Lands' absence from Perplexity and ChatGPT recommendations?

Google AI Overviews / Brand Recommendation Prompt: "Where can I get a good quality backpack?" Result: Public Lands appeared in the qualified observation set for this prompt and earned recommendation credit, contributing to its 8.11% coverage rate on AI Overviews, its strongest platform result.

Perplexity / Brand Recommendation Prompt: "outdoor stores near me" Result: Public Lands recorded a single neutral mention across 69 Perplexity observations in September 2026, with zero valid recommendations, illustrating the brand's absence from Perplexity's recommendation layer.

Google AI Mode / Brand Recommendation Prompt: "camping toilet" Result: Public Lands appeared within the largest observation pool in the benchmark, where it reached 5.81% valid recommendation coverage across 155 observations, its highest-volume platform opportunity.

ChatGPT / Brand Recommendation Prompt: "sporting goods store near me" Result: Public Lands recorded five mentions and one valid recommendation across 72 ChatGPT observations, a 1.39% coverage rate that places the brand well behind REI at 26.39% and Bass Pro Shops at 19.44% on the same surface.

What CiteWorks Studio Would Do Next

Phase 1: AI Market Discovery Audit Map every prompt where Public Lands is mentioned but not recommended, and identify which competitor takes the recommendation slot and on what stated attribute.

Phase 2: Recommendation Readiness Plan Prioritize the highest-volume Brand Recommendation prompts on Google AI Mode and Google AI Overviews, where Public Lands already converts, and define the evidence each answer needs to move from reference to recommendation.

Phase 3: Owned Answer Layer Buildout Strengthen the product, category, and store pages that AI systems retrieve for discovery prompts such as "outdoor stores near me" and "Where can I get a good quality backpack?", so the brand's own content carries recommendation-grade detail.

Phase 4: Citation / Authority Layer Development Build the third-party source footprint that supports recommendation on Perplexity, Copilot, and ChatGPT, where Public Lands currently has no recommendation presence.

Phase 5: Monthly AI Visibility and Recommendation Tracking Track valid recommendation coverage, top-three rate, and rank-one rate month over month against REI, Bass Pro Shops, and the brands immediately above Public Lands in the standings.

Why This Matters

AI research surfaces are now where a meaningful share of outdoor gear shoppers form their retailer shortlist. Public Lands is already being retrieved in those answers. The benchmark shows the brand appearing in 15.5% of qualified observations while earning recommendation credit in only 5.8%, which means most of the times a shopper sees Public Lands named, it is not being positioned as a choice.

Presence alone does not move a buyer. A mention that reads as context, a comparison anchor, or a passing reference does not put a retailer on a shortlist. The next move for Public Lands is targeted correction of the prompt, page, and citation layers that turn retrieval into recommendation, starting with the Google surfaces where the brand already converts and extending that pattern to the platforms where it currently does not appear at all.

Core Metrics

Sentiment Score

Questions This Section Answers

• Why is a raw mention count misleading for measuring Public Lands' AI visibility?
• What does Public Lands' net sentiment score of 0.5301 say about its constraint?

Sentiment Score = (positive mentions × 1 + neutral mentions × 0 + negative mentions × -1) / total mentions

For Public Lands in September 2026: (44 × 1 + 39 × 0 + 0 × -1) / 83 = 0.5301.

This matters because unclassified mention counts are misleading. A brand can appear frequently in AI answers and still lose the recommendation, and a raw mention total will not show that. Share of voice is a diagnostic metric, not a business KPI. It tells you how often a brand is present, not whether it was chosen.

A positive recommendation, a neutral reference, a cautionary mention, and a competitor-displaced mention are not equal events. Public Lands' 39 neutral mentions are not the same as its 44 positive mentions, and neither category is the same as a valid recommendation. Counting all mentions as wins is bad measurement. Classified sentiment is required before interpreting AI visibility, because it separates framing quality from recommendation strength and shows which of the two is actually limiting the brand.

Public Lands' sentiment score of 0.5301 is a strength. The brand is not being framed negatively or cautiously. Its constraint is recommendation conversion, not reputation.

Sentiment by Platform

Questions This Section Answers

• On which platform does Public Lands have the strongest public recommendation signal?
• Where does Public Lands show positive sentiment but limited recommendation conversion?

Methodology

1. This report is a benchmark-based analysis of Public Lands within the Outdoor Retail and Gear Marketplaces category, produced from the September 2026 LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery dataset and the accompanying CiteWorks Studio category readout. It is not a client implementation result.
2. The reporting window is September 2026, with August 2026 included for month-over-month comparison.
3. Six AI/search surface families were tracked: ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, and Google AI Mode. All six produced at least one qualified observation in September 2026.
4. The September 2026 collection universe contained 800 prompt-surface observations and 647 unique questions. Of those, 740 were relevant, 60 were irrelevant, and 534 qualified observations formed the public denominator used for all recommendation metrics.
5. The competitor universe contained ten tracked brands: REI, Bass Pro Shops, Cabela's, Backcountry, Scheels, Academy Sports + Outdoors, Sierra, Public Lands, evo, and CampSaver.
6. One buyer-intent cluster carried qualified observations in September 2026: Brand Recommendation, labeled Best Outdoor Gear and Retailer Discovery. The Pricing & Value and Multi-Brand Comparison clusters contained zero qualified observations in both tracked months.
7. Stage 0 extraction supplied prompt-level records retaining the query, AI/search surface, answer, brand outcome, recommendation placement, sentiment, and, where exposed, citations or attributable evidence sources.
8. A mention is counted when a tracked brand appears in a qualified observation, regardless of whether it was recommended. Public Lands recorded 83 mentions in September 2026.
9. A valid recommendation is counted when the dataset marks the brand as recommended in a valid recommendation context. Neutral, cautionary, comparison-anchor, and listed-only mentions are not counted as valid recommendations. Public Lands recorded 31 valid recommendations in September 2026.
10. Average recommended rank covers rank-eligible recommendations only. Public Lands' average recommended rank of 3.00 is calculated from its rank-eligible recommendations in September 2026.
11. Public Lands' valid recommendation counts are low in absolute terms, so its coverage rates are more sensitive to small changes than those of higher-volume brands. The 1.6-point gain from August to September 2026 should be read with that caveat.
12. The benchmark does not measure market share, attributable sales, every possible AI response, organic-search ranking, social mention volume, private or sponsored channels, or causality from a metric movement alone. It records what AI research surfaces presented in response to controlled prompts over the measurement period.

See Where AI Is Recommending Your Brand

The public benchmark shows where Public Lands stands in the category. A company-level AI visibility audit shows why, mapping the specific prompts the brand wins and loses, the competitors that take the recommendation when it does not, the attributes AI systems cite, and the source patterns shaping answers across ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, and Google AI Mode.