A refresh
The structure works and the site looks tired. New styling, better imagery, tightened copy on the pages that matter. Fastest and cheapest, and often all that is genuinely needed.
The most common way a redesign damages a business is not the design. It is that pages which used to rank now return errors, and nobody mapped them before launch.
A redesign is worth doing when the site fails on conversion, speed, mobile or maintainability, and it is not worth doing because it looks dated. The critical step is mapping every existing indexed URL to a destination before launch. Skipping it is the single most common cause of a traffic collapse after a rebuild.
The structure works and the site looks tired. New styling, better imagery, tightened copy on the pages that matter. Fastest and cheapest, and often all that is genuinely needed.
The structure is wrong. Pages compete with each other, the navigation confuses people, or there is no page for services you want to be found for. This is an information architecture job with a visual layer on top.
The platform or the code is the constraint. A page builder you cannot escape, a theme nobody can edit, or performance problems that cannot be optimised away. The most expensive option and sometimes the only honest one.
Sometimes an audit shows three specific fixes would recover more than a rebuild, at a fraction of the cost and risk. We would rather tell you that and do the smaller job than sell you a project you did not need.
| Mistake | What happens | Prevention |
|---|---|---|
| No redirect map | Pages that ranked return 404 and the traffic goes elsewhere | Export every indexed URL and map each before launch |
| Content cut for tidiness | The untidy pages were often the ones earning traffic | Check traffic and links before removing anything |
| Staging noindex left on | The new site quietly disappears from Google | Check robots directives on launch day as a specific step |
| URLs changed for no reason | Every change costs some authority in transfer | Only change URLs with a reason and a 301 |
| Redirects to the homepage | Treated as soft 404s and pass little value | Redirect to the closest equivalent page |
| Tracking not reinstalled | You cannot tell whether it worked | Verify analytics and conversions before launch |
We have been called in to fix all six of these, and every one of them was preventable in an afternoon of planning before launch.
| Ask them | A good answer sounds like | Walk away if |
|---|---|---|
| Who owns the code and files? | You do, unconditionally, written into the contract | Ownership depends on staying with them |
| Can I open three sites you built? | Live URLs you can check yourself | Screenshots and a portfolio PDF |
| What is explicitly not included? | A written list with change pricing agreed up front | Everything is included, which means nothing is defined |
| Who does the work day to day? | People you meet before signing | The pitch team is never seen again |
The exclusions question is the one most people forget, and it is the one that decides whether the final invoice matches the quote.
| Stage | What happens |
|---|---|
| Audit | Traffic, rankings, speed, conversion, and what is actually broken |
| Decide | Refresh, redesign or rebuild, with the reasoning written down |
| URL map | Every existing indexed URL mapped to a destination |
| Content | What to keep because it earns, what to rewrite, what to cut |
| Design and build | Around real content rather than placeholder text |
| Launch | Redirects live, tracking verified, sitemap resubmitted |
| Watch | Coverage and traffic monitored daily for the first fortnight |
It can, and it does not have to. Damage comes from missing redirects, removed content and unnecessary URL changes, not from new visuals. A redesign with a complete redirect map and preserved content usually holds its rankings and often improves them.
Export every URL from Search Console, analytics and a full crawl. Map each to its closest equivalent on the new site. Implement as 301 redirects and test every one before launch. Keep the content that was ranking even if it needs rewriting to fit the new design.
An audit answers it. If the structure works and it simply looks dated, a refresh is enough. If pages compete with each other or services have no page, that is a redesign. If the platform itself is the constraint, that is a rebuild. Most people ask for a rebuild and need one of the first two.
Three to six weeks for a refresh, five to nine for a full redesign of a small business site. Migrations with substantial content take longer, and the stage that slips is deciding what content to keep.
Be careful. A site that produces enquiries is doing its job, and redesigns that chase appearance sometimes reduce conversion. Change what is measurably failing rather than what is visually out of fashion, and measure before and after.
With correct redirects, expect two to six weeks of fluctuation then a return to previous levels or better. If it has not recovered after two months, the usual causes are missed redirects or content that was cut.
Yes, and most of our redesign work is exactly that. We audit what exists first, including what we cannot access, and tell you honestly what can be salvaged and what cannot.
Check who owns the domain first, because that determines your options. If the domain is in your name you always have a route out, even if it means rebuilding. This is worth checking before you give notice.
Send us what you are trying to fix and we will tell you what it takes, what it costs, and whether we are the right people for it. If we are not, we will say so.