The cost of a website over time extends beyond the price of building it. Include hosting and maintenance, licences, content work, changes, integrations and any eventual handover when comparing proposals. A three-year budget provides a stronger basis for a decision than the initial price alone.
This applies whether the website uses WordPress, is custom-built with Astro or is developed with AI assistance. This guide shows how to compare two proposals with the same scope, what is often missing from the calculation and which questions to ask before commissioning the work.
Start with the same scope in both proposals
Two prices can only be compared meaningfully when you know what they include. Establish the number of pages and languages, who supplies copy and photographs, what employees must be able to edit and which forms or system connections are required. Also ask how mobile presentation, accessibility, technical SEO and functionality will be checked before launch.
“Website with a contact form” could mean a simple email or a system that routes enquiries, records them in a shared customer overview and alerts someone when delivery fails. These are different deliverables. Use the guide to planning a new website to define the requirement before assessing the price.
Ask for excluded items to be made explicit. An empty line is not the same as a zero cost. If content, migration or training is missing, add an estimate or obtain a price before comparing the total.
Which costs should you include?
- Initial delivery: Discovery, content, design, development, integrations, migration, testing and training. Establish who will also review the old content.
- Ongoing operations: Domain, hosting, monitoring, backups, recovery and technical maintenance. Request specific tasks and responsibilities rather than a broad promise of “support”.
- Licences and usage: Editing tools, themes, plugins, images, email services and any AI features. Separate fixed subscriptions from usage-based charges.
- Work after launch: Copy changes, new pages, form adjustments and integration maintenance. Distinguish routine editing from new functionality.
- Unplanned requirements: Establish which faults are covered by the delivery or maintenance agreement and which changes require a separate order. A contingency allowance should have a reason.
- Closure or handover: Exports, documentation, new accounts and assistance for the next supplier. Include this as a separate scenario if a move is relevant.
Avoid double counting. If licences are included in the monthly price, do not add them again. If the maintenance agreement includes integration checks, distinguish those from hours budgeted outside the agreement. Record who invoices each item, what it covers and what triggers an extra charge.
How do AI, WordPress and Astro affect the cost?
AI can speed up exploring ideas and producing draft code or content. That says little about the total cost until requirements, review and ongoing operations are clear. Ask the supplier to explain the deliverables, who reviews the work and how faults are handled. A quickly built prototype is not a maintenance plan.
WordPress is released under the GPL licence. That does not make development, hosting, paid extensions or maintenance cost-free. The WordPress security guide covers updates and preparedness, among other topics. Ask which of these tasks the maintenance agreement actually covers.
For Astro and custom code, ask how building, publishing, editing and connected services will work. Astro’s deployment guide describes different ways to run a site and specific requirements for on-demand rendering. Costs therefore need to be assessed for the actual setup. A simple website and a system with sign-in, a database and commerce have different operational needs.
With AI tools, also distinguish building the solution from consumption while it is running. Lovable describes build activity, Cloud operations and AI features in its credits and usage documentation. Establish what the subscription includes, who pays for increased use and what happens at a usage limit. Do not base a multi-year budget on an introductory arrangement or included allowance remaining unchanged.
We use more custom code and Astro where they suit the requirement, but the technology name does not prove a lower total cost. Read the background to our work with Astro and AI. Compare the agreed deliverables and responsibilities, whichever tools are used.
A fictional example: two proposals over three years
All amounts below are fictional assumptions for the calculation. They are not market prices, client figures or quotations from Færder Marketing. A and B do not represent particular platforms either. The example demonstrates how to structure a comparison.
Assume the same scope in both proposals: eight Norwegian content pages, two editors, one contact form and one simple connection to a shared customer overview. The business supplies approved copy and images. Both proposals cover the same design and quality requirements, editor training and launch checks. Initial delivery includes setting up the integration; annual integration work covers subsequent maintenance.
The period is 36 months from launch. Prices remain fixed, with no inflation or financing costs. Amounts are in Norwegian kroner, excluding VAT. The monthly fee covers the domain, hosting, backups, monitoring and agreed technical maintenance. Licences and hours on separate rows are additional. This scenario also budgets for one handover at the end of the period.
| Budget item | Proposal A | Proposal B |
|---|---|---|
| Initial delivery, once | NOK 45,000 | NOK 75,000 |
| Operations: NOK 1,800 / 900 per month × 36 | NOK 64,800 | NOK 32,400 |
| Licences: NOK 2,400 / 1,200 per year × 3 | NOK 7,200 | NOK 3,600 |
| Editing and minor changes: 12 hours per year × 3 × NOK 1,200 | NOK 43,200 | NOK 43,200 |
| Integration maintenance: 6 hours per year × 3 × NOK 1,200 | NOK 21,600 | NOK 21,600 |
| Contingency outside the agreements: 8 hours × NOK 1,200 | NOK 9,600 | NOK 9,600 |
| Handover at the end of the period, once | NOK 6,000 | NOK 6,000 |
| Total including contingency | NOK 197,400 | NOK 191,400 |
On small screens, scroll the table sideways.
In this example, A costs NOK 30,000 less initially, while B has a budget that is NOK 6,000 lower over three years. B requires more money upfront. The difference in the total is small enough for a change in the hours required to reverse the conclusion.
The NOK 9,600 contingency is money set aside, not an invoice that will necessarily arrive. If none of it is used, the totals are NOK 187,800 and NOK 181,800. First establish whether a fault should be corrected under the agreement. Do not count the same corrective work in both the fixed fee and additional hours.
Check what happens when the assumptions change
A single total can suggest false precision. Change one assumption at a time and see whether the choice still makes sense. Here, the scope and other rates stay the same. For two years, use 24 monthly fees and two years of licences and hourly work; initial delivery, contingency and one handover stay unchanged.
| Assumption | Proposal A | Proposal B |
|---|---|---|
| Three years as budgeted | NOK 197,400 | NOK 191,400 |
| Two years of use before handover | NOK 151,800 | NOK 157,800 |
| Three years, but B needs 6 additional supplier hours each year | NOK 197,400 | NOK 213,000 |
On small screens, scroll the table sideways.
Over two years, A is NOK 6,000 less expensive in the model. Six additional supplier hours a year for B add NOK 21,600 over three years, making A NOK 15,600 less expensive. This is not a forecast for either proposal. It shows which assumptions to clarify before relying on a small price difference.
Also consider higher traffic or usage, an additional language and subscription price increases. Ask about expected usage and the cost of a more demanding period. For services billed in a foreign currency, make the exchange-rate assumption and who bears any change explicit. Do not give a precise extra cost without a basis; record what needs investigating instead.
Include your own time and assess what the website should contribute
The tables cover external costs and a contingency allowance. Your own staff time is additional. In a separate fictional estimate, two hours a month for content, approvals and checks, valued at NOK 600 an hour, amount to NOK 43,200 over 36 months. This is an internal planning rate, not a claim about salaries or an additional supplier invoice.
Ask employees to try routine editing before choosing the solution. A low operating fee offers limited value if minor changes take unnecessary time or always require outside help. Equally, using a supplier can make sense when you publish infrequently and want to spend your time elsewhere. Cost this against the actual division of work.
An online shop needs a different budget from the example. Product data, payments, shipping, returns, stock and accounting can create both fixed and usage-based costs. Advertising spend and substantial content production are also outside the tables. See the guide to websites, online shops and the wider customer journey to map a larger scope.
Assess cost against the task the website should perform: clearer information, fewer manual steps or more relevant enquiries. Do not subtract hoped-for extra revenue from the cost budget as though it were certain. Instead, define what you will measure and track progress across comparable periods. The guide to measuring a website’s impact explains how.
Reduce costs without postponing necessary work
Start with what you already have. A clearer message, better service pages or one improved form may solve the main problem. For a new build, prioritise what must work at launch and describe later functions as separate phases. That makes clear what you are deferring and what adding it later might cost.
Supply approved copy, images and contact routes early, consolidate feedback and appoint one person to approve the work. Request reusable page templates for common needs. Also agree a simple process for estimating and approving changes before work begins. This makes the scope easier to manage without cutting testing or necessary maintenance.
Documentation and handover should be part of the plan. A saving that depends on only one person understanding the solution may create more work later. Use the guide to ownership and handover to clarify code, data, licences and access before committing.
Questions to resolve before commissioning the work
- What does the initial price include, and what must we supply or pay for ourselves?
- Which fixed and usage-based costs follow launch, and when can prices change?
- What do maintenance and support cover, which faults are corrected under the agreement and what requires separate work?
- Who handles routine changes, how many hours are assumed and how do we approve extras?
- What happens if usage grows, we need another integration or we want to change supplier?
- What is the budget for the same scope over two and three years, including our own time and a justified contingency?
At Færder Marketing, we start with the requirement, the current solution and the people who will use it. That gives us a basis for proposing what to retain, improve or build, and for setting out operational responsibilities and subsequent work in the proposal. Read about how we work with websites, or send us your requirements, constraints and existing website to discuss a specific project.
