If you have asked three people for a website quote and received figures of €700, €2,500 and €6,000, it is reasonable to wonder what on earth you are actually buying.
The short answer is that web-design prices include far more than the visible pages — and different providers have completely different cost structures, processes and scopes.
Sometimes a higher price is justified because the project genuinely needs more strategy, more content, more design work or more technical development.
But there is another reality in this market that small businesses should be told plainly: some web designers and agencies charge inflated project fees, add recurring monthly costs that are difficult to justify, and still deliver generic template-based websites that underperform.
A high price is not proof of quality.
A low price is not proof of poor quality.
The only useful test is what is actually being built, how well it solves the business problem, what the client owns at the end, and what they are expected to keep paying for.
Gavin’s perspective
My view
I came back into web design after working in finance, small-business processes, automation and data-heavy systems.
That background probably influences how I see this.
I do not think the goal is to build the most technically impressive solution available.
The goal is to build the simplest good system that solves the real problem.
For many small businesses, that means: strong design, good content, fast pages, clear calls to action, sensible search foundations, simple hosting, and established tools for anything specialised.
If that can be delivered with less overhead, the client should benefit from the efficiency.
But where the project genuinely needs more people, more thinking or more technology, it should cost more.
A website is not priced like a physical product
If you buy a specific model of laptop from three retailers, you can compare nearly identical products.
Websites are different.
A quote might cover research and strategy before a page is designed, then copywriting, photography, UX and visual design, followed by development, CMS configuration, SEO foundations, analytics, accessibility, integrations and testing. Some providers also include training, hosting, maintenance, project management and account management.
That is why two quotes that both say "five-page website" can describe completely different projects. The page count tells you very little about the amount of thinking, specialist work or support wrapped around it.
What are you actually paying for?
Discovery
Before designing anything, someone has to understand: the business, customers, competitors, services, goals, calls to action, brand, and what the site needs to achieve.
For a simple local business, this may happen in a focused conversation.
For a large organisation, discovery can involve workshops, research, stakeholder interviews and formal documentation.
The second process costs more because it is more work.
Content structure
Deciding what information belongs where is part of the job.
A good website has to answer questions in a useful order.
The homepage cannot simply contain every sentence the owner has ever written about the company.
Someone has to make decisions.
Copy
Many projects stall because the client is told:
"Send over the website content when it's ready."
Weeks pass.
Nothing arrives.
A more involved service may include interviewing the client, drafting copy, editing it and shaping the messaging.
That adds value, but it also adds hours.
Design
There is a difference between adapting a prepared layout and developing a full bespoke design system.
Neither is inherently wrong.
The problem is when the buyer does not know which they are paying for.
Development
Building the pages is only one part of development.
The developer may also be handling: responsive behaviour, forms, accessibility, metadata, performance, analytics, deployment, DNS, integrations, error handling, and browser testing.
More complex functionality creates more implementation and testing work.
Revisions
A project with one decision-maker and two focused revision rounds is very different from a project where six stakeholders repeatedly change direction.
Providers price for that risk.
Project management
Someone has to organise meetings, timelines, feedback, approvals, content and launch.
At a large agency, project management can be a substantial part of the service.
That is not "wasted money" if the organisation actually needs it.
A sole trader commissioning a straightforward site probably does not need the same machinery.
Agency overhead is real
A larger agency may have: salaries, office costs, sales staff, account managers, software, insurance, management, contractors, and specialist departments.
Those costs are reflected in project fees.
But that does not mean the customer receives nothing in return.
A complex organisation may benefit from: specialist expertise, capacity, formal project governance, multiple disciplines, and continuity if one staff member is unavailable.
For the right project, that is valuable.
But plenty of small businesses are not buying that kind of project. They are buying a relatively straightforward website and being charged as though they are commissioning a corporate digital transformation.
That is the part worth challenging.
Gavin's take
I have no problem with a web designer or agency charging a high price for genuinely high-value work. Strategy, strong copy, difficult integrations, branding, e-commerce and complex stakeholder projects all take real time and expertise. What I object to is when the price signals bespoke work but the result does not: a fairly generic template, a few swapped colours and a large recurring bill afterwards. Premium pricing should buy something you can actually identify.
Why can an independent designer charge less?
A small independent studio can have: fewer handoffs, less management overhead, direct client communication, reusable internal systems, a narrow project type, modern low-cost infrastructure, and established integrations instead of custom development.
That changes the economics.
My own workflow at Built by Gavin is deliberately built around that idea.
I am usually not trying to sell a small local business: a six-person project team, a bespoke CMS, a private server, a custom booking system, and a monthly technical retainer.
If the business simply needs an excellent website that explains what it does and generates enquiries, I would rather solve that problem.
Gavin’s perspective
Why can Built by Gavin charge less without using templates?
There is an assumption in web design that a lower price must mean one of two things: a generic template and corners being cut.
That is not how I work.
Built by Gavin is deliberately set up as a lean independent studio. I work directly with the client, keep the project scope clear, use modern development infrastructure, avoid unnecessary layers of project management, and integrate established specialist services rather than rebuilding software that already exists.
Most importantly, the websites themselves are not templates.
The layout, visual direction, content hierarchy and presentation are built around the individual business. I can work efficiently because the process behind the build is efficient — not because the client is receiving the same pre-made website as everyone else.
That distinction is central to the way I price work.
Why do some web designers charge monthly fees?
Sometimes there is a genuine ongoing service: managed hosting, CMS updates, backups, active support, software licences, SEO, content changes, and monitoring.
Those things can absolutely be worth paying for.
But recurring revenue is also attractive to web businesses, and some providers wrap a large monthly charge around a straightforward website because customers do not know what the underlying hosting actually costs.
That is where I think the industry deserves criticism.
If a business is paying €50, €100 or more every month, it should be able to explain what it receives for that money.
"Hosting" is not a sufficient explanation on its own.
A simple static business website can often be hosted for little or no infrastructure cost. If there is no active maintenance, no support work, no software subscription and no ongoing service, a substantial monthly fee may simply be margin.
At Built by Gavin I would rather separate the real costs: the business pays for its domain, genuine third-party services are transparent, and I do not invent a hosting subscription where one is not needed.
Recurring charges deserve the same scrutiny as the upfront quote. I explain the common models in do you really need monthly website fees?.
When should you happily pay more?
Paying more can be entirely sensible when the project genuinely involves sophisticated branding, extensive original content, user research, a large site, e-commerce, integrations, custom software, complex accessibility requirements, several stakeholders or specialist ongoing work.
The goal is not to buy the cheapest website. It is to make sure the extra spend corresponds to something the business actually needs and can identify in the finished project.
It is to avoid paying for complexity without a business reason.
Where the extra price is buying genuine ongoing work, a retainer can be sensible. The useful question is what is included, which is why I separate out website maintenance costs from hosting and general monthly fees.
How do I compare quotes fairly?
Ask each provider the same questions:
- What exactly is included?
- Who writes the content?
- Is the design custom?
- What functionality is included?
- What happens if the scope changes?
- What are the recurring costs?
- Who owns the domain?
- Who controls the hosting?
- Is ongoing maintenance required?
- What support is included after launch?
- What is explicitly excluded?
Then compare the answers, not just the totals.
What I'd do
If I were comparing two quotes, I would ignore the headline price for five minutes and put the deliverables side by side. Who is writing the content? Is the design actually being shaped around the business? What functionality is included? Who owns the domain and site? What happens after launch? What are the recurring costs? That exercise usually tells you far more than whether one quote is €1,000 and the other is €3,000.
Comparing only the headline price can be misleading, so I also put together a practical €500 vs €1,000 vs €3,000 website comparison showing what should actually change as budgets rise.
The bottom line
Web designers can seem expensive because the word "website" hides an enormous range of services.
Do not assume a high quote means the provider is better.
Do not assume a low quote means the provider is cutting corners.
Ask whether the finished site, the scope, the ownership, the recurring costs and the business outcome justify the number.
If you are being charged thousands for a generic template and then locked into a monthly hosting fee you cannot explain, that is not premium web design. It is simply an expensive deal.
That is the comparison that matters.
Want to see how I price things?
My website packages and starting prices are published here.
If you have already been quoted for a project and want a simpler second opinion, you can also tell me what you actually need.
---