We build websites, online stores and software, then look after them for years. What sets us apart is not the technology, because everyone has the same tools, but that we measure what we claim and tell you when a project is not worth building.
Our introduction film. It loads only if you press play, so it does not cost 13 MB to somebody who does not want it.
Almost every firm in our field promises the same thing: a fast, secure, search optimised website. Almost nobody shows numbers. A screenshot of a green dial is delivered, the project is declared finished, and everyone moves on.
The problem surfaces six months later, when the site is slow, when a vulnerability published three months ago is still there, when search traffic has fallen and nobody can explain why. That is when it emerges that nobody measured anything at the start, so there is nothing to compare against.
We built the way we work around that problem. Every claim comes with a figure obtained under conditions you can reproduce, every change has a measurement before and one after, and the report also says what we tried without success. It shows most clearly in maintenance, where the whole thing repeats month after month.
If we say we made the site faster, you get the value from before, the value from after and the identical conditions under which both were taken. If we say a change increased conversion, you get the number before, the number after and the period over which they accumulated.
The uncomfortable consequence is that sometimes the report shows we achieved nothing. We write it anyway.
That you do not need a mobile app but a good mobile site. That an existing platform solves it more cheaply than custom software. That there is no point running campaigns over a site that loses half its visitors while loading.
A project that should not have been built does not become a success however well you execute it, and we are the ones left with it in our portfolio.
Code, hosting, domain, accounts, documentation, all in your name from the beginning. No proprietary components tying you to us, no release fee, no argument.
The test we apply to ourselves: how long an outside developer would need to take the project over. If the answer is "a long time", we built it badly.
Every change goes first through a staging environment identical to production, with a restore point before and verification after. The flows that matter are checked by hand, not only automatically.
It is the boring part of the trade and the only one that makes the difference between a quiet month and a Friday morning on which orders do not work.
It takes around half an hour and it is not a sales presentation. We ask what you want to solve, who the people buying from you are, and what you have tried so far. We look at what you already have, if anything.
At the end you get three things: whether it makes sense to work together, roughly what it means in budget and time, and, fairly often, the cheaper option you had not thought of. If it emerges that you do not need what you thought you needed, you find out then, not after signing.
Most often companies between five and fifty people, where somebody can make a decision without three rounds of approval. The industry matters less than you would expect: problems of speed, security and information structure look surprisingly similar in a clinic, a shop and a manufacturing business.
We are a small team and we work that way deliberately. It means you talk to the person doing your work, not to an intermediary passing it on. It also means we do not take on more projects than we can carry, which is why we sometimes propose a later start date than you would like.
Because they would be invented figures. For maintenance we have fixed price subscriptions, because the work is predictable, and you will find them published. For a website or a piece of software, the cost depends entirely on what has to be built. A number posted there would either be inflated to cover us, or too low and it becomes your problem later.
We talk, in the first week rather than the last. We work in frequent deliveries precisely so you see the result early and often, which means a wrong direction is corrected at the cost of days rather than months. And if at some point you decide to work with somebody else, you leave with everything done so far, no argument.
Even if you do not yet know exactly what you need. Very often the first conversation is about precisely that.