One product, bought in stages.
Discovery first — a paid map you can walk away with. The build is quoted from that spec, so the number is fixed before you commit to it. Care is optional, and it starts after launch.
How buying this works · Discovery → Build → Care
€15,000 IS A REFERENCE-CLIENT PRICE FOR THE FIRST THREE BUILDS — IN EXCHANGE FOR YOUR NAME, ONE QUOTE, ONE INTERVIEW AND ONE REFERENCE CALL. IT CLOSES ON THE THIRD SIGNED BUILD OR 31 DECEMBER 2026, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST; THE ENTRY PRICE IS THEN €25,000. US CLIENTS QUOTED IN USD AT PARITY UPLIFT.
What's inside a Build.
- 01Guided brief wizard
- 02Role views
- 03Color-zoned read view
- 04Built-in workflow
- 05Asset catalog
- 06AI assistance
- 07Comments & mentions
- 08Exports
- 09Admin panel
- 10Process metrics
- 11Figma plugins
- 12Docs & handover
EACH STAGE: DEMO → ONE CONSOLIDATED REVISION ROUND → WRITTEN SIGN-OFF
We already have Monday/Asana. Why this?
Keep it — or don’t. Your tracker answers "who and when". A brief hub answers "what exactly and how it should look" — zoned briefs, role views, brief-to-asset traceability, and micro-logic tuned to your process that no off-the-shelf board can be bent into. We integrate with your tracker or replace it, your call.
What if you get hit by a bus?
The code is yours, the stack is boring, the docs are thorough, and an independent QA engineer knows the codebase. Any competent developer picks it up. We design for our own replaceability.
Why not just buy Workfront / Lytho / Ziflow?
If you’re an enterprise with an admin team — maybe you should. If you’re not, you’ll rent it per seat, every year, forever — and bend your process around fields you can’t change. We build around your process, once, and you own it.
Can't our own designer + developer build this with AI?
They can — the question is when, and at what cost. Your developers have a product roadmap; this project loses every prioritization meeting, which is why it still isn’t fixed. Pull a designer and a developer onto it for two or three months and you pay twice: their salaries, and the work they didn’t ship. AI made the code cheap. It did not make the decisions cheap, and this build is mostly decisions: which roles see what, and what makes the team use it instead of last week’s doc. If you still prefer building in-house: take our Blueprint package — we deliver the spec, architecture and design system, your team builds on top, we review. Both paths work; doing nothing is the only losing one.
Isn't AI-built software low quality?
AI writes code fast; a senior designer-builder decides what to build, and an independent engineer reviews security and quality before handover. You get the speed without the slop.
Who on our side would own this?
Someone has to, and it isn’t a new hire. It’s whoever already answers "is this brief finished?" — usually the person who owns today’s template. Day to day that means the admin panel: users, roles, the catalogs. No developer needed. Code changes are ours under Care from €500/month, or your own team’s — you own the code either way. If you can’t name that person, say so in Discovery: it’s the one thing that decides whether a brief hub gets used or joins the doc it replaced.
How fast is "fast"?
Discovery in 2 weeks. A working core your team can click through in 4–6 weeks. Full delivery in 2–4 months depending on scope — we’ll fix the timeline in the quote.
What about our data / GDPR?
Built to GDPR standard — the strictest baseline there is, so CCPA, LGPD and similar regimes are a short step from it rather than a rebuild. Deployed on your infrastructure at handover, hosted in your region: EU, US, wherever your data must live. DPA available. We never train anything on your data.
Bring the chaos. Leave with a system.
Tell us where briefs break today — a link to the messiest one sharpens it. Within 48 hours you get a written take on exactly what we’d build around it — and slots for a prepared 15-minute call, if you want one.