A team that can self-serve
Content changes happen the same day rather than next sprint.
Most platform decisions are made on what an agency prefers to build. The better question is who will maintain this site in two years, what they will need to change, and how often.
Four expensive mistakes, all made at the very start of a project.
A beautifully engineered custom build that nobody in your team can edit, so every text change becomes a support ticket and a delay.
A platform picked for the current site rather than the plan — then a rebuild when multi-language, commerce or a content team arrives.
Proprietary platforms where the content, templates and URLs cannot easily leave. The cost of changing later is rarely calculated at the start.
The new site launches, the old URLs 404, and months of accumulated rankings disappear in a week. Entirely avoidable and depressingly common.
We start with how your team works: who edits content, how often, what they need to change without a developer, and what the site has to do in two years rather than only today. That determines the platform far more usefully than a feature comparison table.
Then we build for handover from day one — documented, using mainstream patterns, with content structured so it could be exported. You should be able to take the site to another agency without a rebuild, and we would rather you stayed because the work is good.
Search: content management system dashboard laptopContent changes happen the same day rather than next sprint.
The right fit avoids the rebuild eighteen months later.
Content modelling that copes with new sections and markets.
Redirect mapping protects the visibility you already have.
Structured content and documentation keep your options open.
Templates mean new pages take hours rather than days.
What the site must do, and who will maintain it once we are gone.
Written, with reasoning and honest trade-offs, before any build.
Types, fields and relationships designed around how you actually publish.
Templates, functionality and editor experience developed on the chosen platform.
Content moved, URLs mapped, redirects tested before launch.
Documentation, training and the credentials — all of them.
An honest view, including where we would recommend against a platform we can build on.
| Platform | Best fit | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|
| WordPress + Elementor | Content-led business sites, blogs, service businesses | Plugin bloat and maintenance if neglected |
| WooCommerce | Stores wanting no platform fees and full data control | You own performance and security |
| Shopify | Stores wanting infrastructure handled for them | Transaction fees and fixed URL structures |
| Webflow | Design-led marketing sites with a small team | Costs scale with CMS items; developer-adjacent |
| Wix / Squarespace | Very small sites with minimal requirements | Limited SEO control and hard to migrate away from |
| Drupal | Complex permissions, multi-site, public sector | Higher build cost and a smaller talent pool |
| Joomla | Existing Joomla estates being maintained | We would rarely recommend it for a new build |
| Adobe Commerce | Large complex catalogues with enterprise needs | Significant licensing and hosting cost |
Every engagement is scoped individually. These ranges give you a realistic idea of investment before you speak to us.
Prices are in USD and indicative starting points for scoping — final quotes depend on scope, competition and current site condition. [Confirm or edit these figures before launch.]
Project slots are ready for real client work — screenshots, brand names and outcomes drop straight into these cards.
Replace with the platform chosen and why.
Replace with platforms involved and how rankings held.
Replace with the structure built and how the team uses it.
WordPress for content-led business sites, Shopify or WooCommerce for stores. That is not dogma — it reflects that both have deep talent pools, so you are never dependent on one agency. We recommend against a platform when the fit is poor, including ones we build on.
We build and optimise on them, and we will tell you honestly where their limitations bite — particularly SEO control on Wix and Squarespace, and how hard it is to migrate away later.
We maintain and optimise existing Drupal and Joomla sites. For new builds, Drupal makes sense for complex permissions or public-sector requirements; we would rarely recommend Joomla for a new project, and we would say so rather than take the work.
The content moves reliably. The risk is search visibility, and it comes down entirely to the URL redirect map. Migrations that skip that step routinely lose most of their organic traffic — which is why we treat it as the non-negotiable part of the project.
Not in any way we control. We use mainstream platforms with structured content and document everything, so another agency can take over. Some platforms lock you in by design — we will tell you which and what leaving would cost.
Then we build it. We will flag any concerns once, in writing, and then get on with the work you asked for.
Tell us who maintains your site and what you need it to do in two years. We will recommend a platform in writing — including when the answer is to stay where you are.
No obligation. If we are not the right fit for your goals, we will say so.