Cost of a website?

red_ice

I've started to make flash websites and i wanted to know how much the average costis for website of such quality as www.clan-veterans.net . No im not selling this to the clan, it was a project of mine but i am however making websites for other people all of the same standard (i dunno if its high or not).

How much would you charge someone for clan-veterans.net?

Thanks for your help

reD.

p

Maybe €200.

But I wouldn't pay for it.

- Kevin

Sposs

doesnt grab the eye wouldnt charge to much,you'd do well to get €500

The Corinthian

If your approach is professional and they don't think you're just a kid, then between €750 - €2,500. Otherwise, see above.

irishguy

the site looks cool how long does a site like that take to make??btw i have no idea on price

Chaos-Engine

Hey Reddy
I'd be looking upward of €800 myself but you could start higher. I had a similar problem 2 years ago when i started to make sites for the odd company or two. Never actually finished most of the projects but they still pay you for starting them . the best way to find out what the industry charges(and its considerably less than 2 years ago) is to approach some other web design firms. Tell them you are looking for a site similar to VETS. Ask for a quotation ... Once you have a few quotations from small-amuturish designers and a few from the big boys you should know what you can get away with...
Good luck

leeroybrown

Just bear in mind that one of the big selling points that the big web design companies use is that they're "professionals" and not "inexperienced", "unreliable" students/amateurs.

Their customers generally pay a lot for the privilidge of that piece of mind.

RicardoSmith

Didn't RyanAir use a bunch of students on their site?

damnyanks

Right Mr. Occer I'm gonna let you in on a secret.

Design doesnt dictate how much you get payed. It's how much the company / person can afford. If your selling to a small business / individual don't expect a whole lot, but you will get your moneys worth.

If the company has any sense they won't buy a full flash site. Although last I saw macromedia had bought that usability dude off :rolleyes:

My opinion on the site is that you have made a pointless flash file. Nothing is gained by it being in flash it seems like quite a basic html template. If you really wanted to use flash you could of put it in on the 2 main graphics menu's only. It makes the load time horrible.

I'm sure you could sucker some place into buying it but at the end of the day suckering people into useing your services just doesnt help in the long run.

RicardoSmith

Thats a bit harsh. But theres some truth to it. Personally I don't like Flash sites, but some clients do ask for some "Flash" on their sites and some people do like the "Flash" look. So theres obviously a market for it.

damnyanks

Harsh ?

You can't say whats good about a site and ignore anything thats bad. That is no use at all

Bad stuff can be improved , good stuff should be left alone

The Corinthian

Originally posted by RicardoSmith
Didn't RyanAir use a bunch of students on their site?

Ryainair got a pair of students to do the original site, while they were working in a cybercaff in the Temple Bar, and their first site was for a Howth hotel in July 1997. Apparently, they were approached in December 1999 for a site proposal, and got the contract. They say they began constructing the site the following March, and it took three weeks to complete. Ryanair says it paid £10k for their work.

The booking area of Ryanair.com was redone much later by Hewlett Packard's "Open Skies" people, who specialise in inexpensive flight booking systems. I remember having an email discussion with someone who was apparently involved in the project, a while back, and while I can't remember the exact figure, the price tag was a lot higher than £10k.

RicardoSmith

Yeah I heard they spent 1m on the redevelopment. Anyway bet those students were happy! Point is that even big companies will use the little guys at times.

damnyanks - all I can say is that you don't get what flash is useful for. Its cross platform/browser safe. It also ensures that your site stays the way you intended it to look no matter what the user has their browser set to. Doing this anyother way is a lot harder. Also lots of people want to say my site uses Flash. In the same way many people harp on about XML. If the client wants it whats wrong with with giving them a flash site. Certainly lots of big companies have their whole site done in flash so its not unusual as you are suggesting. In fact its more common than ever!

As for you suggestion of "Macromedia buying of the usability dude off" all I can say is I hope Macromedia don't read that they might have a problem with it. Also I didn't realise there was only one dude! LOL

As for red_ice's site. It does what it has to do. It all works, it looks ok, what more could you want? Load times are always a problem for flash sites so that like telling someone the sea is blue. Old old news. Besides the client should have seen other flash sites and be happy with how they work or he wouldn't have asked for it. You should always have an agree max download time for all pages on the sites you do. It protects you from vague, its too slow complaints from the client afterwards.

As for suckering people into things, I dunno where that comment came from. Are you suggesting that by doing something in flash its not as valid as doing it in html, or any other technology? Bit of technology snobbery I think. Its up to the client to decide what way they want the site done. If they don't want a Flash site then don't ask for one!

As for Design not dictating how much you get paid? Well If that was true all sites would look the same and they don't. People like sites if they like the design. If the like the site then they are more likely to ask you to do theres. So I guess it dicates if you get paid, at all!

p

Originally posted by RicardoSmith
Yeah I heard they spent 1m on the redevelopment. Anyway bet those students were happy! Point is that even big companies will use the little guys at times.

Yea, although I doubt that would happen these days. That was 1999. Back then, and now to a fair extent. It's quite possible for a bunch of students to be just as capable as some professionals.

If the client wants it whats wrong with with giving them a flash site.

I think we all know that a client doens't always know what's good for them (o:

Certainly lots of big companies have their whole site done in flash so its not unusual as you are suggesting. In fact its more common than ever!

It is? In my experience I'd say Flash is used on a lot more sites now days but it's moved from the whole site being in Flash to having parts of it builts in flash.

As for you suggestion of "Macromedia buying of the usability dude off" all I can say is I hope Macromedia don't read that they might have a problem with it. Also I didn't realise there was only one dude! LOL

Yea, I think most of the reason macromedia is moving towards accessability is because of Section 508.

As for Design not dictating how much you get paid? Well If that was true all sites would look the same and they don't. People like sites if they like the design. If the like the site then they are more likely to ask you to do theres. So I guess it dicates if you get paid, at all!

It's a terrible shame that what a client sees as a good site isn't always the same thing that a user sees.

- Kevin

RicardoSmith

Well you either the kind of person who will sell a pink rolls royce or your not. In my opinion I only have to make the client happy. If a Flash site is what they want even after I've explained all the pitfalls with it, then I'm happy to do it. Being all high minded about it is all well and good, but it doesn't pay the bills.

leeroybrown

I dislike Flash only sites.

Flash is very nice if used properly (menus, graphics, etc) but I would stray away from doing full sites in it (especially as a single movie).

Flash 6 isn't even supported under Linux/Unix yet.

damnyanks

Most people are on IE these days last I saw it was close to 90%

Of course you can say what about the remaining % that arent on IE.

Well you can say the same for people not using the flash plugin

I said the site was quite a basic template. It would be easy enough to get the site looking the same in HTML through all browsers.

I was talking about Jacob Nielson btw

The suckering comment was with regards to things like " USE FLASH ITS COOL WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH "

In the past I have had people asking about WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH sites. I explained to them that I could put some WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH into there site but having lots of it was not only pointless but would cost them more money

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by damnyanks
Most people are on IE these days last I saw it was close to 90%

Of course you can say what about the remaining % that arent on IE.

Well you can say the same for people not using the flash plugin

I said the site was quite a basic template. It would be easy enough to get the site looking the same in HTML through all browsers.

I was talking about Jacob Nielson btw

The suckering comment was with regards to things like " USE FLASH ITS COOL WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH "

In the past I have had people asking about WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH sites. I explained to them that I could put some WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH into there site but having lots of it was not only pointless but would cost them more money

Ummm all browers - Netscape 3-7/IE 3-6/Opera...

So I came to you and said I want a flash site heres 10k you would go and say I can do it in HMTL for 3k?...

WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH - is that a technical term?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by RicardoSmith
WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH - is that a technical term?

Funny, WHOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHH is not a term that springs to mind when I think of Flash downloads...

RicardoSmith

sure isn't... LOL

damnyanks

Was just pointing out how I don't encourage bells and whistles

WHOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH

So I came to you and said I want a flash site heres 10k you would go and say I can do it in HMTL for 3k?...

That won't happen. There isnt that sort of price difference. I could say the same about a 10k html site and 3k flash site so thats just not a good argument.

I'll use flash with Mx server but there isnt that much of a demand for that.

Macromedia and sites that use flash in that sort of manner are the only good times its used imo

The Corinthian

A few more thoughts on pricing (that don’t involve the debate on Flash):

Professionalism: As has been mentioned already, clients will seek peace of mind, and as such the more professional a Web development firm or consultant comes across, the higher the rates that they will be able to command. Examples of this professionalism might be proper project methodology and management; portfolio/case studies; as well as appropriate business practices.

Size/Time: As a general rule, most projects are charged on a time and materials basis - that is, a daily/hourly rate plus expenses (e.g. software licences, hosting, etc.). As such, the larger the project, the longer it’ll take to do, the more it’ll cost.

Skill Level: The more rarefied and complex the skills needed for the project, the more expensive. A Web site that was constructed using nothing more than a WYSIWYG and some snarfed JavaScript won’t fetch a fraction of the rate of a site that includes a bespoke application, such as a custom (JSP - Oracle 9i) CMS, for example.

Miscellaneous Considerations: These would include possible discounts for multiple projects, higher rates to reflect unusual client demands (such as a very tight deadline) or contra deals.

RicardoSmith

damnyanks - WHOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH
the sound of you missing my point entirely.

What I'm saying is, that there is a market for purely flash built sites so don't discount just because it uses flash. As sometimes some clients ask specifically for flash sites. The fact that you can do exactly the same thing in 6 other technologies is neither here nor there IMO.

I've never found anyone who needed or wanted MX server either.

What do you think of this one? http://www.terroirs.ie/

damnyanks

Splash page = no real use

Otherwise good site.

And no its not because it is in flash, splash pages are just useless unless its trying to detect something which the really never are.

RicardoSmith

Fair enough. Do you think the use of flash was worthwhile?

damnyanks

Like I said I don't see any good reason to have it there. The main nav bar looks like it was a flash file exported or something though. If it was I wouldnt of minded it either because it's a good use of flash.

Fully flash based sites are annoying thats my opinion , especially ones that don't offer proper drop in points.

Illkillya

Reddy if you're doing a flash site like this, remember that they might keep pestering you for small changes, and a one week enjoyable job could become very long and drawn out (and not worth it unless you're getting a lot of money for it).

leeroybrown

Back to the whole flash sub-thread.

Entirely flash sites are good for show-piece sites.

For other sites I think Flash does provide good results (with reasobable file sizes) but a few smaller applets embedded in the page can provide the same effect while allowing easier use of Non-Flash options (simple images, non-flash menu's, etc).

DJB

This is a very interesting thread... which I'd like to throw my 2 Cent into...

Working with flash...
I played around with flash for awhile when I was starting out. I was juggling a lot html, flash, asp, vb, databases, marketing, basically trying to know it all. It didn't work. I quickly realised that to make it in this game, you have to specialise in a certain area and have a good understanding of the others. I decided to work on content management for the web using ASP. I do like some flash sites, when they load quickly and look cool or have something funny on them, etc.

If you are going to do a flash site ALWAYS offer an html website to accompany it. I prefer browsing html sites and being able to highlight text, view source code and so on. Also, if the page doesn't load, I refresh. You refresh in flash it loads the whole lot again. Well, I am sure you know the down side to it.

What I have been impressed with is seeing a flash site that is built on the fly using cold fusion. I found a link to it on macromedia.com and the site was entirely in flash but all the content was coming from a database. It was pretty cool! That combined with a html site that also got the information from the database would be cool. Flash, I think you have to treat as an add on to an existing website. Complimentory if you will, once it is used effectively.

1 Cool flash site(flash and html)... www.dynamicapps.biz

1 funny flash file (you should know this one)... www.introducingmonday.co.uk

Charging for your work...
This can be very difficult. And there were some very good advice from others on it. You have two choices... charge per project or per hour. You have to look at who the client is and decide which approach to take. If you are dealing with a small business, the cost of the project will be very important. Get as good an estimate as you possibly can for the time to complete site. Pick a price per hour and work out the cost. Add on any purchases you need to make and there is your price. Give that to the client and tell them that for the work they want done, that is what it will cost. Any changes to the specification, will cost extra and include a price per hour for work done outside the quoted job. In theory the job will only cost that much and you charge the client that price. They know the cost up front. But it doesn't always go like that.

Then you have the big clients or the ones that put a lot of work through you. These usually like to billed on a per hour basis. Again use your charge per hour and record all work you do for them on time sheets. At the end of the month submit invoice with timesheets attached. When quoting for job give an estimate of the hours it will take. If you over budget hours, you can save the client money when you submit invoice. They see it is cheaper then budgetted and think this is cool! We saved money! But there is always the other side of the coin, if it takes you longer than expected.

The price you charge per hour, that's a tuffy. As someone said above, you have to look at overheads, expertise, portfolio, case studies, premises and all that. The bigger you look, the more you produce, the better your service, the more you can charge. Coming out of college, maybe look at EUR 20 per hour. If that is too cheap, then go to EUR 30. The more experience you get, the more you can charge. Eventually, you will meet clients that can't afford say EUR 100 an hour, and you won't do the work for them. You can't afford to work for anything less because of your overheads, etc.

It's all economics in the long run... lower price, more sales, lower quality service/product.... or high price, less sales, but higher quality service/product. When I was trying to break into a higher market, I found that companies would not consider my quotation because they perceived that I was too cheap, and because I was cheap, the job would not be as good, even though it would!!

It's perception(human behaviour) and economics you should look at for quoting. Try getting quotes from other design companies, that will give you a good idea too.

Enough waffling from me. Good luck with it all. Hope I contributed to your questions.


Cheers,

Dave

red_ice

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Skill Level: The more rarefied and complex the skills needed for the project, the more expensive. A Web site that was constructed using nothing more than a WYSIWYG and some snarfed JavaScript won’t fetch a fraction of the rate of a site that includes a bespoke application, such as a custom (JSP - Oracle 9i) CMS, for example.[/B]

I know this post is about a year old, but i completely forgot about it!

The site itself had alot of code actually, and the way it is laid out looks very simple, but there are about 20 graphical layers, 15 animated layers, and alot of code behind the actualy interface.

The site is easy to update, and all the text you see in the site itself is done via a text pad, which weighs in at a whopping 7k or something.

The website is VERY dynamic and for the skill level i was at at the time, its far more advanced that what alot of poeple who were actualy trained in flash can do.

Granted the site has no market for the average user, but i can make a flash site look like html if i wanted to, and probably make it use up less bandwith.

Ive moved onto other projects with flash, and yea they are all for gaming teams - for example the one im working on atm (located here) is still VERY basic, and looks really taccy, but i have so much work left to do in it.