Web platforms
Marketing sites, dashboards, portals and internal tools. Fast, accessible, and built so your team can update the parts that change often without calling us.
Web platforms, mobile apps and the infrastructure underneath them — built by the team that will still be maintaining them.
Plenty of studios can get a product to launch day. The harder question is what happens in month eight, when the original developer has moved on and a small change turns out to require rewriting three things nobody documented.
We build assuming we will be the ones maintaining it. That changes the decisions: boring, well-understood technology over whatever is fashionable this quarter; tests around the parts that would genuinely hurt to break; and a codebase a different developer could pick up without a séance.
It also means we will push back. If a feature will cost more to maintain than it will ever earn, we would rather have that conversation before it is built than bill you for it twice.
The real cost of software is not building it. It is changing it later.
Whether that is a full platform or one stubborn piece of an existing system.
Marketing sites, dashboards, portals and internal tools. Fast, accessible, and built so your team can update the parts that change often without calling us.
iOS and Android, native or cross-platform depending on what the app genuinely needs — not on what is quicker for us to build.
Getting your systems to talk to each other. Usually the least visible work, and the one that removes the most manual copying between tools.
Hosting, pipelines and monitoring, so shipping a change is routine rather than an event that requires everyone to be online.
Teams who need something specific built properly and expect it to last. If you need forty developers by next month, we are the wrong shape — we are a studio, not a body shop, and we would rather say so early.
Rarely at the beginning. Most of this work starts partway through someone else’s.
“It works, but nobody dares change it.”
The original build had no tests and no documentation, so every change is a gamble. The fix is not always a rewrite — often it is putting a safety net around the risky parts first, then changing them.
“It was fine at 100 users.”
Something built quickly to prove an idea is now load-bearing. That is a success, not a failure — but the shortcuts that made it fast to build are now the thing making it slow to run.
“Half of it is someone copying between two systems.”
A person is acting as the integration layer between tools that were never connected. It is usually the cheapest thing on this page to fix and the one that gives back the most hours.
Including the ones with answers people do not always want.
Often, yes. We would start by reading it and giving you an honest assessment — sometimes that assessment is that continuing costs more than restarting. We will show you the reasoning rather than just asserting it, because that conclusion conveniently favours us and you should be able to check it.
It depends on scope, and anyone quoting a timeline before understanding the problem is guessing. What we can promise is that you get the estimate in writing, and that we tell you early when something is going to slip rather than at the deadline.
Yes. Code, repositories, accounts and infrastructure are all yours, handed over at the end. You should be able to hire someone else tomorrow and have them pick it up.
Expected — software that never changes is software nobody uses. We can stay on for ongoing work, or hand over cleanly to your own team. Both are normal, and we do not price the handover as a penalty.
Bring the rough version. We would rather see the actual problem than a tidied-up specification.
Get in touch