A site for a company that provides services

Because they are looking for a specific service, not "services". The page for a specific request has something to answer this person: how the work is going, how long it takes, what the amount depends on, who has already done it. The list does not correspond to anyone. Technically, a separate page is the only way to give a service its own address, its own title, its own form, and its own Service markup. While the service remains an item on the list, it does not exist in the search, and there is nowhere to advertise it either.

The ones that customers look for individually and that you do regularly. Our recommendation: do not start a page for a service that you perform twice a year - it will not gain weight and will take away attention. Breaking the list down to thirty almost identical pages is also harmful: they compete with each other, and no one wins. During the analysis, we go through your list item by item and show what to combine and what, on the contrary, to separate.

Landmark — yes. It screens out appeals that don't match expectations from the start and saves the manager time. The form that works in most cases is a range or cost per unit of work plus an honest explanation of what the final amount depends on. Hiding a number completely makes sense only where it is counted for the project every time - then we put a calculator or an open list of factors in its place.

There is no public fork here on purpose. Volume is determined by two things: the number of services that will receive a separate page, and the state of your texts. Therefore, first, a free analysis in 2-3 working days - we compile a list of pages and see what content is already available. After that, we give an estimate by stages and calendar dates. If it turns out that it is enough to improve the existing site, we will count the improvements, not the new project.

15-35 working days from the approved TK. Six phases: Breakdown and pagemap days 2-4, prototype 2-4, design 4-8, build 4-10, fill with markup and analytics 2-6, test and deliver 1-3. The deadline almost always rests on the texts of the service pages: no one but you knows them, and we will not invent them. When the process is described at least in voice, we structure it, and the schedule is maintained.

Yes, this is the evidence part of the site. In services, confidence is bought, not a description of the process: a photo of the object with a brief description of the task and the period of work is more convincing than a paragraph of text. Each work is linked to the page of the service, the link goes both ways. We do not publish other people's works and do not attribute other people's figures to ourselves - and we do not advise you: in our sample, it happens that the description of the project in the portfolio does not match what is actually on the website.

It depends on who will live with the site further. WordPress with Bricks — when you edit the texts yourself and add services without a developer; the downside is that the page is heavier, and you have to monitor for plugin updates. Next.js — when there are many service pages and they are collected from one template; the downside is that without a CMS layer, the content is edited in the code. In our measured projects, the difference in HTML weight was 119.5 KB vs. 102.1 KB—less than the difference in who gets to work with it later.

No one guarantees a position, and neither will we. We close the technical part: a separate address for each service, unique title, canonical, site map without duplicates, JSON-LD Organization, Service and FAQPage. Markup gives a chance for an extended snippet, but does not increase the position by itself, and you can only markup what is actually on the page. The most common hole is here: on both of our measured service sites, the sitemap either returns a 404 to an address with robots.txt, or does not return to any standard address.