Details
| Founded: | 2010 |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | N/A |
| Employees: | N/A |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $50,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.2
7 Reviews
|
Industries Served
About
It is a mobile app development company based in West Virginia. They work as a technology partner by knowing the requirements of business challenges and use latest technologies to provide some innovative IT solutions to their clients. They work for startups & corporate clients, and their feedback is really good. They are known to use the latest technology in every product.
Aronfield Agency Reviews
The first CMS rollout where editors asked for more of it, not less
Nicolas Fontaine / Directeur Technique | Jun 08, 2026I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.
Project summary
Our app was sitting at a 2.9-star average, and nearly every negative review mentioned the same two things: speed and how convoluted the booking flow had become.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | CMS Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Nov 2025 - May 2026 |
| Business Type: | Travel & Hospitality |
|---|---|
| Location: | Lyon, France |
Questions & Answers
Execution matched the proposal on every dimension that actually mattered to us
Aoibhinn Molloy / Director of Product | Apr 26, 2026We had proposals in hand ranging from roughly half to well over double what we eventually paid this team. What set their proposal apart wasn't the price — it was that the number matched what they actually delivered, almost line for line. I've been burned before by proposals that were really just opening offers in a negotiation that continues throughout the project. That wasn't the case here, and I don't say that lightly.
Project summary
Portal usability complaints were showing up disproportionately among the B2B accounts we were about to lose at renewal. The self-service experience needed a full rebuild before that cycle hit.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Low-Code / No-Code Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | May 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Telecommunications |
|---|---|
| Location: | Galway, Ireland |
Questions & Answers
Product teams can finally move independently instead of queuing behind each other
Willem Jansen / Chief Technology Officer | Mar 28, 2026Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.
Project summary
Our LMS had been designed for a classroom-only world, and two years of declining satisfaction scores made the hybrid-delivery gaps impossible to ignore any longer.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | DevOps Services |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Education |
|---|---|
| Location: | Rotterdam, Netherlands |
Questions & Answers
Compliance program landed on time and cleared the regulator without a single remediation note
Angus Fairbanks / Chief Digital Officer | Feb 09, 2026We handed this team an aggressive deadline, a genuinely complicated scope, and a client-side team on our end that was stretched thin and slow to respond at times. They handled all of it without complaint. When they needed something from us they asked precisely and on time. When they didn't, they just kept moving. The project still landed on schedule despite our side being the weaker link for a good chunk of it, which tells you something about how they operate under pressure.
Project summary
Warehouse errors were becoming visible to clients, not just internal reporting. A modernized WMS was already the agreed direction internally — we just needed someone to actually build it.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Cybersecurity |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Apr 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Logistics & Supply Chain |
|---|---|
| Location: | Brisbane, Australia |
Questions & Answers
Explained the blockchain concepts in plain terms instead of burying us in jargon
Reem Al-Ghamdi / VP of Engineering | Feb 04, 2026Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.
Project summary
Our client portal hadn't been touched since it launched years earlier, and clients had started comparing it unfavorably to competitors' portals in live pitches.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Blockchain Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | May 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Legal Services |
|---|---|
| Location: | Riyadh, Saudi Arabia |
Questions & Answers
Compliance program landed on time and cleared the regulator without a single remediation note
Griffin Ashcombe / Managing Director, Tech | Jan 13, 2026I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.
Project summary
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 5.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Cybersecurity |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Mar 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Fashion & Apparel |
|---|---|
| Location: | San Francisco, USA |
Questions & Answers
Started as a single project and earned a permanent spot on our preferred vendor list
Tanner Ridgeway / VP of Operations Technology | Jan 08, 2026Going in, the integration work was what worried me most. Our systems landscape is messy, a couple of the third-party APIs we depend on are barely documented, and one of those vendors has a well-earned reputation for slow, inconsistent support. This team absorbed all of that. They documented what the upstream providers wouldn't, built in resilience wherever the upstream behavior was flaky, and shipped something that has worked exactly as specified since go-live. I genuinely couldn't have asked for more on that front.
Project summary
Our internal engineering capacity was fully committed to keeping existing systems running, with no room for a build of this size. An outside partner with the right depth was really our only option.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Low-Code / No-Code Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | Less than $10,000 |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Fashion & Apparel |
|---|---|
| Location: | Salt Lake City, USA |
Questions & Answers
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

