What is here, and what is not This page is going to be thin for a while.

This page is going to be thin for a while, and it's worth explaining rather than dressing up.

Writing up a project properly means two things I don't have yet for most of them. Written permission — I'd been assuming rather than asking, and I'm asking now. And the measurements, taken before and after, which I have for some engagements and not for others.

What I'm not going to do in the meantime is pad it. An unnamed "leading DTC brand" with an unverifiable percentage next to it is the thing this entire site argues against, and putting one here would cost me more than an empty page does.

Most of what does get written up will be anonymous, and that isn't modesty. A good share of my work is white-label — the client's client never knows I was involved, which is the promise the engagement was won on. A case study that names them breaks it. So the work appears without the name, scored against the same published checks, and that's the version worth having.

If you want to know whether I can do the specific thing you need, the audit answers that faster than a longer version of this page would — it runs the checks on your store rather than showing you someone else's. Send me the store →

The record

Nothing here yet. As permissions come through, engagements appear here scored against the same checks — what the store inherited, which checks failed, what was decided, and the re-score afterwards. The checks →

The one I lost, and what it cost them

A store doing about $2M asked me for an audit. I ran it, wrote it up, and we went through it together — they agreed with every finding. Then they went with a quote that was a fraction of mine.

I want to be careful here, because the easy version of this story is that they were foolish and they weren't. They had a number they could compare and a document they couldn't. Two proposals, one at a fifth of the price, and no way to judge what the difference bought — which is precisely the problem this site exists to address, and on that day it beat me.

What happened after is the part worth having: the work was done, and the specific things the audit flagged are still there. Not because the cheaper developer was bad — because those findings needed the work the price didn't cover, and nobody had told them which parts of the quote were the load-bearing ones.

That's the whole cost-of-cheap argument, and I'd rather give you the honest version of it than a graphic. The gap between a $3,000 quote and a $15,000 one is real, it is invisible at the point of decision, and the only way to see it in advance is to have a list of what to check. The checks →