Information architecture, a content model the team can actually operate, and measurement designed before the build rather than bolted on after it.
A homepage carrying six audiences convinces none of them.
Most business websites are a homepage doing the work of twelve pages, followed by a contact form. It reads as comprehensive and performs as vague, because a visitor arriving with one specific question has to sift the other eleven answers to find theirs.
A marketing site works when each real question has somewhere to live. That means a page per service the business actually sells, per sector it genuinely serves differently, and per decision a buyer has to make before they will send a message. Anything else is a page written for the organisation chart rather than for the person reading it.
The structure also has to be maintainable. Ten pages that share three templates can be extended by the marketing team. Ten bespoke pages become ten small liabilities, and within a year nobody updates any of them.
Which is why the content model comes before the design. What kinds of thing exist, what fields they have, how they relate, and which of them appear in more than one place. Get that wrong and every future page is a development request.
Skipping any of them shows up later as a page nobody can change.
Swipe the parts
First
What the business claims, for whom, and why this rather than the alternative. Written before anything is designed, because design cannot rescue an unclear claim.
Second
A page per real intent, arranged so a visitor and a search engine can both find the specific answer without reading the general one first.
Third
The types, fields and relationships behind the pages, so new content is an editing task rather than a development ticket.
Fourth
What counts as a result, how it is recorded, and how it is attributed. Specified during the build, because retrofitting it means losing the first quarter of data.
The requirement decides. The framework is not the proposition.
| The requirement | What we would build | Why |
|---|---|---|
| A compact site, updated occasionally | Astro with content in the repository | Static output, nothing to maintain, and the fastest thing to load |
| A growing site the marketing team edits weekly | Astro with a managed headless CMS | Editing without a release, with the performance of a static build |
| Frequent campaign pages from a template | Astro with a modelled page type | New pages become content entries rather than development work |
| Personalised or server-rendered behaviour | Next.js | Application behaviour the static model does not cover |
| An existing WordPress the team runs well | Keep it, and fix what is actually failing | Replatforming a working site is an expensive way to solve a content problem |
We are not against WordPress. We are against inheriting a site whose performance and maintenance problems come from twenty plugins nobody chose deliberately.
The list that protects the traffic the old site already had.
Most avoidable losses on a new marketing site happen in the first week, and nearly all of them are on this list.
Where something cannot be finished before launch, it is recorded as an accepted risk with an owner and a date rather than left to be noticed.
Published starting figures in GBP and USD, excluding VAT.
From-price or scoped after discovery
Up to 20 pages
From £2,000From $2,600
A compact marketing site or one focused lead-generation system, on a defined page and component scope of up to twenty pages.
Starting price
Lead generation
From £4,000From $5,200
A complete marketing and lead-generation website: the messaging, the structure and the enquiry routes a qualified buyer needs to make a decision.
Starting price
One bounded piece
£1,500$2,000
One bounded improvement: landing pages, a template rebuild, an analytics implementation, or a build-readiness review credited against a larger project.
Fixed price
Page count is the weakest predictor of cost. What moves the price is the number of distinct templates, whether a CMS is required, how much content has to be written, and what the site has to integrate with.
As many as there are real questions, and no more. A page exists because someone arrives looking for that specific answer. Pages created to look substantial dilute the ones that matter and give the marketing team more to maintain than they can.
Only if someone other than a developer has to change the site regularly. A site updated twice a year does not need one, and adding it introduces a subscription, a modelling exercise and another system to keep current.
We write messaging and page structure, and work with your material or a specialist writer for the rest. What we will not do is fill a site with generic copy to meet a word count, because that is the thing most likely to make it read as untrustworthy.
It will be technically sound, structured around real search intent and fast, which is what a site can control. Rankings depend on the market and on everyone else competing in it, and nobody honest guarantees them.
The questions your sales team keeps answering by email are usually the pages the site is missing.
