Somebody in a meeting says the website could do with replacing. Everybody nods, because nobody likes the current one. A month later a quote arrives for a serious sum and the conversation stops, because nobody can say what exactly that money would improve.
The order is wrong. The question is not „do we want a new website?“ but „what specifically does not work on the current one, and can it be fixed?“. The answer to the first is always yes; the answer to the second decides whether you spend a tenth of the money or all of it.
This article lists eight signs that a site has had its day, and for each an honest answer about whether it is a repair or a rebuild. Half of them can be solved without a new website.
Short answer
- Decide by what is wrong, not by the age of the site. A six year old site that brings enquiries and can be edited does not need replacing.
- Looks, copy and page structure can be changed without touching the foundations. That is a repair.
- Speed, the content editor and what the site runs on cannot be added later. That is a rebuild.
- The strongest sign is not how it looks but that you are afraid to touch it. A site nobody has updated for a year ages faster than one that merely looks older.
- The cheapest first step costs nothing: measure the site and go through it on a phone. Half the decision makes itself.
Eight signs and what to do about them
Go through them in order and answer yes or no. The right hand column tells you which case you are in.
| Sign | What is usually behind it | Repair or rebuild |
|---|---|---|
| No enquiries despite traffic | Structure and copy, not technology | Repair |
| The site looks dated | Visual design, typography, photos | Repair, if the design can be swapped |
| You are afraid of the content editor | A general system with two hundred menu items | Rebuild of the content side |
| It is awkward on a phone | A layout built for desktops | Depends on age: repair or rebuild |
| The site is slow | Plugins, third party scripts, heavy photos | Rebuild; speed cannot be added later |
| You cannot add what you need | A hosted platform or a template | Rebuild |
| Competitors look better | Usually only looks, not features | Repair, and check it first |
| Nothing has been touched for a year | Nobody can, or nobody dares | Find out why first, then decide |
Notice that four of the eight signs lead to a repair. Companies still almost always reach for a new website, because a repair requires knowing exactly what is wrong, and nobody went and found out.
The rule that decides it for you
It is simple and it works on all eight cases.
Whatever can be swapped without touching what the site runs on is a repair. Whatever would mean building the site again is a rebuild.
Looks, copy, photos, the order of sections and adding a page belong in the first group. Speed, the content editor, the technology and whether a crawler can read the content belong in the second. The price difference between them tends to be tenfold.
The practical consequence: if your only problem is that you do not like the site, you are buying looks. That is legitimate, but it is fair to know you get nothing else with it. Enquiries are not raised by a new look but by a different structure and different copy.
Three checks that decide half the cases
They cost nothing and take twenty minutes between them. Do them before you write to anybody.
- 1Measure the site in PageSpeed Insights and look at the mobile score. Under fifty, speed is a real problem, and that means a rebuild rather than a repair.
- 2Go through the site on a phone, outdoors, one handed. If you cannot find the phone number within ten seconds or the text cannot be read, the problem is layout and contrast.
- 3Try swapping a photo and rewriting a paragraph yourself. If it takes more than two minutes or you need help, you know why the site has not been updated for a year.
That third check tends to be the most uncomfortable and the most useful. A site nobody dares open ages through its content even while it still looks fine. And stale content costs enquiries more reliably than a dated design, because the customer concludes the company may not even be trading.
The site is five years old, it is time for something new. Budget is a hundred thousand, make it look modern. What exactly should improve can be worked out as we go.
The site brings no enquiries, scores 34 on mobile and nobody in the office dares swap a photo. The first two mean a rebuild, so we are going ahead, and we know why.
When a new website is not worth it
This section has to be here, because it is written by somebody who sells new websites.
- When the site works and you simply do not like it. Enquiries arrive, it can be edited and it is fast. A new look is then a purchase that improves none of those things.
- When you do not know what is wrong. A new site built without answering that question repeats the same mistakes in a nicer wrapper. Measure first, decide after.
- When the problem is not the website. A company without enquiries often has no trouble with its site, only with nobody arriving on it. That is a marketing problem, not a rebuild.
- When you have neither the budget nor the time right now. Half a website for half the money gets rebuilt entirely a year later. Waiting is more honest and cheaper in total.
The last point deserves an addition. When the budget is short, the single most expensive place can be fixed on its own: the homepage and the form. It usually costs a fraction of a rebuild and on a site with traffic it shows sooner.
Enquiries are not raised by a new look but by a different structure and different copy. Looks decide trust, not action
What to do if it comes out as a rebuild
Three things in this order, so no work is wasted.
First export the list of addresses and traffic from the existing site. Not just before the new one launches. Without it there is no redirect map, and without that you lose search positions.
Then write down what should improve, not how it should look. A one page brief, seven points. Quotes then compare and nobody delivers something other than what you wanted.
Finally, question the suppliers. Questions before signing reveal more than a portfolio, particularly about what happens after launch.
How we handle it
When you send us a website address, the first thing we do is assess what is there. Not send a quote.
- We measure the speed with an independent tool, so the result cannot be argued with, and we go through the site on a phone.
- We look at how many pages it has and how many get search traffic, because that decides what has to be preserved.
- We say what is a repair and what is a rebuild, and for a repair we estimate what it would cost.
- If the answer is to leave the site alone, we write that. We have lost work that way, and it is cheaper than a client discovering a year later that a large sum bought them the same thing.
And the honest other side: we take on repairs of somebody else's site only when there is something to build on. On a site assembled from twenty plugins on a ten year old template, a repair usually costs more than a rebuild, and we say so straight away.
Frequently asked questions
How do I know it is time for a new website?
Not by its age but by what is wrong. Looks, copy and structure can be changed without touching the foundations, so they are repairs. Speed, the content editor and the technology cannot be added later, so they mean a rebuild. A six year old site that brings enquiries and can be edited does not need replacing.
How long does a company website last?
Technically five to eight years, if it is built on ordinary technology and somebody applies updates. It ages far faster through its content, particularly where nobody dares open the editor. A site nobody has updated for a year feels older than one with a five year old design and fresh content.
Will a new design bring more enquiries?
On its own, usually not. Looks decide trust in the first few seconds, but whether somebody sends an enquiry is decided by page structure, copy and the length of the form. If your only problem is that you do not like the site, you are buying looks, and it is fair to know you get nothing else with it.
What does repairing an existing site cost against replacing it?
It depends what is being repaired, but the order of magnitude is a tenth of a new site. The cheapest and most effective is usually rewriting the homepage and shortening the form; on a site with traffic that shows sooner than a whole rebuild. What cannot be repaired is speed, the content editor and the technology.
What should I do before asking for quotes for a new site?
Three checks in twenty minutes: measure the site in PageSpeed Insights and look at the mobile score, go through it on a phone outdoors one handed, and try swapping a photo in the editor yourself. Half the decision makes itself, and the rest you will be able to describe specifically.
What if I have no budget for a new site?
Wait, and in the meantime fix the single most expensive place: the homepage and the form. Half a website for half the money gets rebuilt entirely a year later, so in total it costs more than postponing. An honest supplier will say so.
Summary
- What is wrong decides, not how old the site is.
- What can be swapped without touching the foundations is a repair. What would mean building again is a rebuild.
- Four of the eight usual signs lead to a repair rather than a new site.
- The strongest sign is not how it looks but that you are afraid to touch it.
- Three checks in twenty minutes decide half the cases and cost nothing.
- If you do not know what is wrong, a new site repeats the same mistakes in a nicer wrapper.
Not sure which case you are in
Send us your website address. We will measure it, go through it on a phone and say what is a repair and what is a rebuild. If the answer is to leave it alone, we will write that. No commitment and no quote you did not ask for.