We build the software, then we run it.

Yes, and it is a large part of what we do. Inheriting a codebase is slower to start than a rewrite and almost always cheaper to finish. We begin with a read-only review — what it does, what it costs to run, what is actually broken — before proposing anything.

You do, from the first commit. The repository is yours, the infrastructure accounts are in your name where you want them to be, and you can take everything and leave at any point. A client who cannot leave is not a partnership.

Fixed scope, fixed price, agreed after we have understood the work — not an hourly rate, which charges you more the slower we are. Ongoing services are a monthly retainer set against an agreed response time. We quote after the first conversation, never before.

It depends on the system, and anyone who answers this before seeing yours is guessing. What we will commit to is a date for the first working increment, usually within a few weeks — that is the number that tells you whether the estimate for the rest is worth anything.

The ten products above are the answer. They are ours, they are live, and you can use them. That is a more honest sample of how we work than a portfolio of screenshots from projects you cannot open.

Yes, and we will sign yours rather than insist on ours. It costs nothing and it is a reasonable thing to ask of anyone you are about to describe your business to. Nothing you send us goes into a case study, a testimonial or a pitch deck without you seeing it first.

Whatever you choose. Some clients take the handover — repository, infrastructure, documentation — and run it themselves or with their own team. Others keep us on a monthly retainer for monitoring, updates and incidents. The handover happens either way, on the same day, because it is what makes the second option a decision rather than a dependency.

Yes, and it is often the better arrangement. We take the part that needs the depth — the data model, the accounting or stock engine, the API — and your team keeps the parts they already know. What we ask for is one person on your side who can make decisions, because the thing that stalls a joint project is never the code.

Your accounts, your region, your choice of provider. We will recommend one and set it up, but it is in your name from the start. A supplier who owns the hosting owns the exit, and we would rather you stayed because leaving was easy and you did not want to.

You stop, you pay for the work delivered up to that point, and you keep it — the code, the database, the documentation, all of it. There is no penalty clause. A project that has become the wrong project should be cancelled quickly, and a contract that punishes you for noticing is a contract that makes you notice late.

Retail and point of sale, hospitality, clinics, schools, tutoring marketplaces, and accounting underneath most of them. That is our own product work rather than a client list, and we say so plainly — "industries served" on most software company sites means somebody once sent an invoice in that sector.

Big enough that the software has to be right, which usually means the spreadsheet has stopped coping rather than any particular headcount. We are a poor fit for a first prototype that needs to exist next week, and a good one for a system several people will depend on for years.