One visitor.
Four people to convince.

In most cases yes, at least a model and a range. The argument for hiding it assumes a buyer will call to find out; in practice most self-qualify out and you never learn they existed. If your pricing genuinely varies with scope, publish the model and what drives it - that is far more useful than silence, and it filters out the deals you did not want anyway.

Because if you do not write it, someone else does - a competitor, or an affiliate site with no stake in describing you accurately. Buyers actively search "X versus Y" and "alternatives to X" when they have a shortlist and a budget, and a fair comparison that names where a competitor genuinely fits better builds more trust than one pretending you win every category.

By wiring forms into your CRM with source, campaign and content attached, then following those records through to opportunities and closed revenue. It means the first couple of quarters give an incomplete picture, and we would rather show you a partial one than a traffic count that implies more than it knows.

If you sell to anyone with a procurement process, yes, and it is one of the highest-return pages you can build. It rarely ranks for anything and it removes an entire round of email from every deal. Certifications, data handling, hosting regions, sub-processors, uptime - whatever your buyers actually ask, answered once, publicly.

Whichever matches how you genuinely sell, and only one should lead. Offering trial, demo and "contact sales" with equal weight makes the visitor do the segmentation work, and they will often choose wrong or choose nothing. If your product demonstrates itself, lead with the trial; if it needs configuring or explaining, lead with the conversation.

That is the design goal. Content is modelled so case studies, comparison pages and integration pages can be added from templates without a developer and without the navigation degrading. A B2B site is a publishing platform - if publishing needs a ticket, it stops happening.

Not if it is planned properly. We catalogue what currently ranks before starting, preserve URLs where they are sound, redirect deliberately where they change, and monitor Search Console through launch. B2B sites often have valuable long-tail pages that nobody internally remembers - finding those first is part of the audit.

Three to six weeks for most builds. Complex information architecture, a large existing content library or a migration pushes it further. The committee mapping at the start adds a few days and reliably saves more than it costs.

We write the structural pages - comparison, pricing, security, use cases - and interview your team for anything requiring real domain depth. For technical products we would rather spend an hour with your solutions engineer than produce something that reads convincingly to nobody who matters.

Usually WordPress for content-heavy marketing sites, sometimes a headless setup where your team needs the same content in several places. We choose based on who has to maintain it after launch rather than on what is fashionable, and we will tell you when your existing platform is fine.

We do, and for B2B the overlap is substantial - the comparison and use-case pages that serve the buying committee are the same pages that capture bottom-of-funnel search, and the CRM attribution serves both. You can also hire us for the build alone.

We will tell you on the call. We turn this down when the site is not the constraint - fairly often the real problem is that nobody knows the company exists yet, which is a demand problem rather than a design one. Either way you will leave knowing what to fix first.

30 minutes. We look at your site the way a buying committee would, find where deals go quiet, and tell you what we would do and roughly what it would cost. If we are a fit, we scope it. If not, no hard feelings - no follow-up sequence, no pressure.