There are no shortage of companies that can take on website development, but the differences in service capability are far greater than the differences in price. When choosing a service provider, rather than comparing quotations, an enterprise should first verify a few more fundamental things.
1. Look at who is doing the work, not whether they have a business license
The barrier to entry in the website building industry is low, so “taking orders and then subcontracting” is a common model. The way to judge is not complicated; you can verify three things: how long the company has been in continuous operation—for entities established recently, after-sales continuity is hard to guarantee; the team’s office setup—whether there are fixed designers and developers on staff, and whether there is remote outsourcing; what system is used—for self-developed systems, check whether the admin backend is easy to use; for open-source systems, confirm their maintenance status (some early open-source CMSs have stopped updating for years, and continuing to use them for new projects poses security risks).
In addition, the ownership of the source code should be confirmed. A reasonable agreement is: after project delivery, the website source code and admin backend management permissions belong to the client.
2. Check whether the cases are “live”
Screenshots of cases are easy to make look good, but they do not tell you the operational status. A more effective way to verify is to open the actual live sites: first, test access speed—if above-the-fold loading exceeds three seconds, it will noticeably affect the experience; second, actually open it on a mobile phone and check navigation usability, image integrity, and button tap areas; third, see when the news section of the case site was last updated—long periods without updates usually mean no one is maintaining it; fourth, check the search performance of core keywords, which can indirectly reflect how much attention the service provider pays to SEO.
3. In the contract, domain ownership matters more than source code
Many enterprises focus tightly on source code ownership when signing contracts, but overlook the domain name. In fact, source code can be redone, but once a domain name cannot be retrieved, the loss to brand and traffic is harder to make up for.
Therefore, the contract should at least state: “Ownership of the domain name belongs to Party A, the real-name information uses the client entity’s materials, and the management backend account is transferred upon delivery”; “Party B must unconditionally cooperate with DNS resolution adjustments and transfer-out of the domain name, and may not charge unlock fees or transfer fees in any form”; “Server management permissions are transferred simultaneously with delivery.” At the same time, the list of deliverables, acceptance criteria, number of revisions, and after-sales response time limit should be written into the contract; verbal promises should not be relied upon.
4. After-sales support starts on the day the site goes live
A website going live is not the end of the project. On a daily basis, someone needs to be responsible for server inspections, security patches, and data backups; content maintenance requires training and Q&A; and when sudden failures occur, there needs to be a response channel.
A simple way to judge: before signing, contact the other party’s technical support as an ordinary inquirer and observe the response speed. That speed is usually the actual speed after signing.
5. Break down the quotation to look at its structure
The difference between low price and high price is usually reflected in four aspects: whether custom design is done, the number of pages and scope of functions, whether mobile adaptation and basic SEO configuration are included, and the scope and duration of after-sales service. Enterprises should break down the quotation according to these four items for comparison, rather than only looking at the total price. At the same time, ask clearly about the annual payment standards for domain names, servers, SSL certificates, and maintenance fees, to avoid discovering a change in the cost structure only when renewing in the second year.
In our experience, the gap between quotation and delivery mostly comes from vague contracts rather than technical difficulty. Confirming the above items clearly before work begins costs less than negotiating afterward.