How to Choose a Web Developer and Not Get Burned

Why is choosing a developer harder than it looks?

The problem isn't that there are too few offers - there are too many, and they all look the same. Everyone shows pretty mockups, everyone promises deadlines, everyone has an "individual approach". You cannot tell the person who will finish the project from the person who will vanish after the prepayment by reading their ad copy.

The difference shows up in the details, not in the promises: what someone is willing to show you, what they are willing to put in writing, and how they answer awkward questions. Below is what is worth checking before you transfer any money.

What should you look for in a portfolio?

There is one main criterion: the portfolio has to open. Not mockup images, not screenshots in a deck, but links to live sites that are working right now. A pretty mockup takes an hour to draw and says nothing about whether the person can carry a project through to launch.

What you can check on those sites yourself, with no special knowledge: whether they open on a phone without the layout falling apart, whether they load fast, whether the contact form works, whether the content is real or it is "Lorem ipsum" and filler text everywhere. If a portfolio has three projects and all three are pictures you can't open, that is not a portfolio.

Look separately at whether the person has a public face: a website, a name, a work history. Someone with a visible reputation has more to lose by disappearing with your money than by giving it back.

What questions should you ask before paying?

Four questions that save you months of frustration.

What exactly is included in the price? Not "a website", but a list: how many pages, which sections, who writes the copy, who sources the images, whether the form and analytics are included. A vague "we'll make it all look great" later turns into "that wasn't included".

What happens after handover? Whether there is a support period, what it covers, how much later changes cost. A website is not a painting - it will need editing.

Who owns the accounts? The domain and the hosting should be registered in your name and paid for with your card. This is the key point: if the domain is registered to the contractor, you don't own your own website and you can't move to another developer without losing something.

What do I get at the end? Access to the hosting, the domain, the admin panel, the analytics - the whole set. If the developer hands over only a link to the site, you stay on their hook.

What signs mean you should walk away?

Red flags, in descending order of seriousness.

Demands 100% prepayment. The normal arrangement is staged, with the main part tied to a result you can see. Full prepayment means all the exposure sits on your side.

Won't show live sites. "Projects under NDA", "I'll send the portfolio later", "our work is in a closed database" - in small business there is no NDA on a business-card site.

A price several times below market. A price that is too low means one of two things: a template from a site builder passed off as unique work, or a person who takes on a lot of cheap orders and can't keep up with them. Both end the same way.

Won't put anything in writing. Even without a formal contract, the scope, the price and the deadlines should be written down in your correspondence. Refusing to write it down is refusing to be responsible for the result.

Communicates reluctantly at the start. If you have to wait a week for a reply before you pay, it won't get faster after you pay.

Freelancer, agency, or one-person studio?

Honestly: there is no universal answer, it depends on the task.

An agency makes sense when the project is big and complex: integrations with internal systems, many roles, a staff and formal commitments. You pay for that with a markup for the brand and the structure, and with speed too - approvals down the chain take weeks. If your task is that scale, go to an agency, that is not my format.

A freelancer is the cheapest, and that is the point of one. The risk is disappearance and the absence of process: usually the scope isn't fixed, there is no support after handover, and if the person moves on to another project, you will be the last to find out.

A one-person studio is the middle ground: the price is closer to a freelancer, the process is closer to an agency. It works when the task fits into one person's hands: a landing page, a corporate site, a redesign. It doesn't work when you need a staff and ten hands working in parallel.

Define the scale of the task first - and half the choice makes itself.

How does it work with me?

INSITE is a one-person studio, so whoever sold the work does the work: you talk directly to the person building your site, with no manager in between.

The portfolio is open, all the projects are live - you can open them and check. The scope and the price are fixed before the start: a landing page from $250, a multipage site from $600. Payment is staged. Hosting and the domain are registered in your name and on your card - you own the site, you don't rent it from me. At the end I hand over all the accounts and a month of support.

I will sign a contract if that makes you more comfortable; by default I work from an agreed proposal with a fixed scope.

If you want to check me against the criteria in this article - get in touch, I'll show you the projects and answer any of the four questions above.