Agency, freelancer
or building it yourself with AI?
Three ways to get software, with three very different bills afterwards. Below, point by point, where the difference comes from, written by someone with an interest in you picking option three and who therefore just says so.
Agency, do it yourself,
or me.
An agency with seventeen people and a wall of well-known logos does things I don't. I do something else: you talk to the person building it, it ships in weeks instead of months, and it costs about half.
Swipe sideways for all columns →
| Traditional agency | DIY with AI tools | Webframer | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead time | 3 to 6 months | Weeks, until it stalls | 2 to 6 weeks |
| Price | €25,000 and up | Low, until you need help | Fixed fee, known up front |
| Who builds | Rotating team | You, next to your day job | One person, start to finish |
| Who you talk to | Account manager | A chat window | The builder himself |
| Code ownership | Sometimes | Yes | Always |
| When it goes wrong | Change requests | You're on your own | 30 days of support |
Where those differences come from.
Lead time
An agency takes longer because the work passes through more hands: a strategist writes a brief, a designer makes screens, a developer builds them, a project manager guards the planning and everyone waits on someone else now and then. That is not laziness but handover, and handover costs days that never show up on a timesheet. With one person that handover does not exist: Tuesday's conversation is in the code on Wednesday. Building it yourself with AI is the fastest of the three at first, until the moment you hit a problem the tool does not solve, and then it stands still for as long as you do not know the next step.
Price
The price difference with an agency is not in the rate but in what you help pay for: offices, account management, sales, and the hours that go into internal alignment. Those are real costs that have real value at an agency, just not all of it for you. Building it yourself with AI looks almost free, and that holds until you need help; the bill still arrives, only later and usually higher, because someone has to work out what is there before anything can be built.
Who builds
At an agency a rotating team builds, and that is a risk that only becomes visible after delivery. The developer who designed your data model may not be there in a year, and their knowledge of your exceptions leaves with them. With one builder there is one head holding everything, which is the strength and the limitation at once, because that person can fall ill too. That is why code ownership with a one-person builder is not an extra but a condition.
Who you talk to
Every layer between you and the code costs precision. You explain how your process works, an account manager writes it down, a developer reads it and fills the gaps themselves. Usually right, sometimes just wrong, and you only notice at the demo. If the person building it is also the person hearing your explanation, that translation step disappears. It matters most for the things you almost forget to mention, and those are exactly the things it later gets stuck on.
Code ownership
At agencies this is more often a contract question than people expect: sometimes you get the code, sometimes a licence on something that stays theirs, and sometimes the hosting sits on their account which makes the distinction academic. Ask, even when the answer seems obvious. With me it is always yours: repository, hosting and domain are in your name, and that means you can replace me without rebuilding anything. If a builder is awkward about that, you know enough.
When it goes wrong
At an agency unforeseen work usually lands in the change-request category, because a team with fixed staffing cannot overrun without invoicing. Building it yourself with AI, there is nobody to call: the tool gives a next answer, not a solution. With me the risk of things turning out harder sits inside the fixed price, and I fix faults in the first thirty days at no cost, which I can do because I wrote the code and therefore know where to look.
I am not the right choice
for everyone.
Choose an agency
If alongside building you also need brand strategy, campaigns, photography and content production, or if your organisation requires a supplier with several people on the contract. An agency can supply capacity one person simply does not have.
Build it yourself with AI
If you want to test an idea, are making an internal tool for a handful of colleagues, or simply want to learn how it works. As long as there is no customer data and no payments in it, this is a fine and cheap way to discover what you actually want.
Call me
If something has to exist that keeps running while you are not watching it: a site that produces customers, a portal with real data in it, a product people pay for. Or if you started with one of the first two and are now stuck.
If you are torn between the last two, it helps to look at what goes wrong when it breaks. If a mistake can touch your customer data, your revenue or your reputation, someone should be able to answer for it. If you would rather see what there is to build first, have a look at the demos or at earlier work.
Is a freelancer always cheaper than an agency?
What if you fall ill or stop?
Can I start with an AI tool myself and bring you in later?
How do I know whether a builder knows what they are talking about?
More questions? All frequently asked questions
Tell me what you
want to build.
A half-hour call. You get an honest answer about what it costs, how long it takes and whether building it is smart at all.