Details
| Founded: | N/A |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | N/A |
| Employees: | N/A |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $100,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.3
8 Reviews
|
Industries Served
Travel & Hospitality
Information Technology
Logistics & Supply Chain
Environmental Services
Nonprofit & NGO
Telecommunications
Media & Entertainment
Government & Public Sector
About
A team of C9 comprised of skilled developers and reliable designers whose main focus is to provide you with solutions that enable your business to thrive. They have years of experience creating solutions for small, medium & large multinationals alike. They develop excellent products that charm customers and stimulate brands. They develop outstanding digital products like mobile applications and digital businesses that go past the required.
C9 Reviews
4.3
8 Reviews
Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout
Nicolas Fontaine / Directeur Technique | May 19, 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
Dynamic pricing had been run manually for years. We knew the revenue upside was real but had no in-house way to build the models and wire them into the booking engine.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | POS System Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Nov 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Travel & Hospitality |
|---|---|
| Location: | Lyon, France |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Directeur Technique at Étoile Technologies SAS I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Travel & Hospitality operations out of Lyon, France. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly POS System Development, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their POS System Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Travel & Hospitality — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Travel & Hospitality experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI model we took to the board was deliberately conservative. Current performance against that model puts us on track to hit payback well ahead of the eighteen-month target we set. The operational efficiency gains in particular have outpaced the model, partly because the new platform's data quality supports decisions the old system simply couldn't.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Absolutely, with one caveat worth mentioning: the value really starts in discovery, so clients who take that phase seriously will get the most out of it. We put real effort in upfront and it clearly paid off in what got delivered.
Friday deployments finally feel routine instead of something to brace for
Kenji Watanabe / Director of IT Strategy | May 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
Our headcount had grown faster than our platform engineering depth. We needed an experienced team to close that gap while we hired, without letting quality or the roadmap slip in the meantime.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Apr 2026 |
| Business Type: | Information Technology |
|---|---|
| Location: | Yokohama, Japan |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Director of IT Strategy at Kirin Digital KK I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Information Technology operations out of Yokohama, Japan. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The Quality Assurance & Testing investment we'd scheduled twelve months out suddenly needed to happen in six, and building it internally in that window wasn't realistic.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full Quality Assurance & Testing lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We shortlisted five vendors through a structured process. The technical review knocked two out right away. Of the remaining three, this team stood out because their Quality Assurance & Testing approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Information Technology — not just case studies pulled off a website. The reference calls confirmed everything the proposal claimed.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly. The requirements document was detailed enough that our own QA team used it directly to build acceptance criteria. Every user story had a clear business reason attached, and nothing was left open to interpretation. That discipline early on paid off through the rest of development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live about three months ago. User adoption beat the target we'd set by roughly 20 percent in the first month, and support ticket volume has dropped noticeably since. Features we'd shelved because the old architecture made them too expensive to build are now back on the roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Information Technology looking for real Quality Assurance & Testing depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
A team that clearly played the game obsessively before building a single feature
Mahnoor Sheikh / Head of Technology | Apr 21, 2026What actually moved the needle wasn't their ability to follow a spec — any competent team can do that. It was their willingness to push back when a requirement didn't make sense, explain clearly why, and help us decide on something better instead. That extra layer of judgment took the final product past what we'd actually asked for and closer to what we genuinely needed, which isn't always the same thing.
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.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Oct 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Logistics & Supply Chain |
|---|---|
| Location: | Faisalabad, Pakistan |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Chenab Digital Agency, a growth-stage Logistics & Supply Chain company based in Faisalabad, Pakistan. My role as Head of Technology covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Logistics & Supply Chain, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Game Development piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was Game Development, though their involvement grew to include technical consulting during discovery that meaningfully sharpened our own requirements. They also took full ownership of the third-party integration work, which had been a coordination headache on past projects, and just handled it themselves.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We were coming off a failed engagement and went into vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny. We asked pointed questions about how they handle scope changes, how they estimate, how they communicate bad news. The answers were specific and consistent across everyone we spoke to on their team, which gave us confidence it wasn't a rehearsed pitch.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious Game Development program in Logistics & Supply Chain and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
Their architecture review steered us away from a vendor decision we would have regretted
Hamza Farooqi / Co-Founder & CTO | Apr 14, 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 product thinking internally was solid, but our execution depth in this particular technical domain wasn't. We needed real specialists, not another generalist team.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | IT Consulting |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | May 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Environmental Services |
|---|---|
| Location: | Karachi, Pakistan |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Co-Founder & CTO at Karakoram Software House I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Environmental Services operations out of Karachi, Pakistan. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Environmental Services, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The IT Consulting piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope ran the full IT Consulting lifecycle — discovery, requirements, architecture, development across roughly a dozen sprints, integration testing, performance validation, deployment, and a four-week hypercare window afterward. They also handed over full documentation and ran a knowledge transfer session for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
The questions they asked during the briefing stage told us most of what we needed to know. Vendors who ask sharp questions during sales tend to bring that same rigor into delivery, and that held up. The technical proposal had real substance, the team was senior from the start, and the pricing was straightforward.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Environmental Services experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
On time and inside the approved budget. Their estimating was notably accurate — they'd broken the work down in enough detail during discovery that the forecast held up the whole way through, instead of drifting with every small change. We had exactly one change request, and it was for scope we added ourselves.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The clearest measure is how the system's actually performing in production. In the four months since go-live we've had zero major incidents, our page performance scores improved across every Core Web Vitals metric, and two enterprise clients who'd previously flagged our old platform's limits during renewal talks signed again without raising it.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their willingness to just be direct. If our requirements were unclear, they said so. If our priorities contradicted each other, they explained why. If an approach we'd assumed was right actually had real downsides, they told us before we'd committed to it. That kind of honesty is exactly what I look for in a long-term partner.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes — though I'll add that they're not the cheapest option out there and they're selective about what they take on. If price is your main filter, look elsewhere. If you need a partner you can trust with a serious IT Consulting program in Environmental Services and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved
Konstantin Bauer / Leiter Digitalisierung | Apr 04, 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
This project had a board-facing deadline tied to a wider strategic push. We needed a partner who'd treat that date like it was their own problem, not just ours.
| 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: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Mar 2026 |
| Business Type: | Nonprofit & NGO |
|---|---|
| Location: | Munich, Germany |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Bauer Industrie GmbH is a Nonprofit & NGO business headquartered in Munich, Germany. As Leiter Digitalisierung I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Nonprofit & NGO, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Low-Code / No-Code Development piece specifically needed specialist skills we couldn't realistically hire for on the timeline our business plan demanded.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The core of it was Low-Code / No-Code Development, though their involvement grew to include technical consulting during discovery that meaningfully sharpened our own requirements. They also took full ownership of the third-party integration work, which had been a coordination headache on past projects, and just handled it themselves.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Nonprofit & NGO space had used them for something similar in Low-Code / No-Code Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Low-Code / No-Code Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Very well. The discovery phase was more thorough than anything we'd been through with prior vendors. They pushed back on requirements that were vague or contradictory, suggested better alternatives where our own thinking was limited, and produced a spec our internal stakeholders agreed was the clearest version of the product they'd ever seen written down.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Professional throughout. The project manager always had a clear view of the critical path and flagged changes to it honestly, without spin. The one significant scope change we made mid-project went through a clean process — fairly priced, clearly documented, and absorbed without knocking the rest of the timeline off course.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project came in on schedule. Budget stayed within the agreed ceiling, including one scope addition we asked for ourselves, which was quoted fairly and handled without disturbing the rest of the timeline. Nothing about the invoice came as a surprise.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Low-Code / No-Code Development work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
What they did after launch. A lot of vendors treat go-live as the finish line. This team treated it as the start of a different phase — the hypercare period was substantial, the documentation held up in practice, and they checked back in at the thirty and ninety day marks to go over production metrics with us unprompted.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Nonprofit & NGO network, both times to people facing Low-Code / No-Code Development problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.
A team that clearly played the game obsessively before building a single feature
Tanner Ridgeway / VP of Operations Technology | Mar 11, 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
How long it took us to launch a new tariff had become a genuine competitive disadvantage, and the product configuration layer was the obvious bottleneck to fix first.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Sep 2025 - Jan 2026 |
| Business Type: | Telecommunications |
|---|---|
| Location: | Salt Lake City, USA |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Operations Technology at Summit Line Logistics I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Telecommunications operations out of Salt Lake City, USA. We're a commercially minded business, so every technology decision gets judged on what it actually contributes to the bottom line, not on how elegant it looks on paper.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our Game Development capability had become the thing slowing everything else down. New feature requests, client asks, internal initiatives — all of it kept queuing up behind a platform that had been stretched way past what it was originally built for. We needed a proper rebuild, not another patch.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly Game Development, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Telecommunications space had used them for something similar in Game Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Game Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Better than we understood them ourselves, honestly. The workshops they ran surfaced assumptions we'd never questioned and exposed a few requirements that flatly contradicted each other. Sorting that out before development started saved us from what would have been serious rework later.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The most structured project management I've dealt with from any outside vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, and retrospectives actually led to changes rather than just being a box to tick. The backlog and risk register were both treated as live tools, not paperwork. I never once had to chase a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Game Development work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Telecommunications looking for real Game Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
Finance and operations finally look at the same numbers — worth more than it sounds
Hamish Bellamy / GM of Technology | Jan 09, 2026This was our fourth agency in three years, and I say that with some embarrassment. Every previous engagement had looked promising on paper and fallen apart somewhere in delivery. What was different here was the sequencing: they spent real time understanding the actual problem before proposing anything, rather than pattern-matching to a solution they already knew how to sell. The build ran to schedule, our own engineers had genuinely positive things to say during handover, and four months into live operation we haven't had a single critical incident. We're already talking about the next phase with them.
Project summary
Audience data was scattered across eight different tools with no shared identity layer. Personalization was never going to work until that foundation got fixed first.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | ERP Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Feb 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Media & Entertainment |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, Australia |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Tasman Commerce Group, a growth-stage Media & Entertainment company based in Melbourne, Australia. My role as GM of Technology covers product engineering, platform operations, and our vendor relationships. We'd hit a point where our internal capacity just couldn't keep pace with what the roadmap demanded.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
A competitor move forced our hand and compressed a roadmap item we'd planned for the following year. The ERP Development investment we'd scheduled twelve months out suddenly needed to happen in six, and building it internally in that window wasn't realistic.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly ERP Development, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Media & Entertainment space had used them for something similar in ERP Development and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, ERP Development depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Better than we understood them ourselves, honestly. The workshops they ran surfaced assumptions we'd never questioned and exposed a few requirements that flatly contradicted each other. Sorting that out before development started saved us from what would have been serious rework later.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Proactive and well-calibrated. Technical detail for the engineering side, plain summaries for the steering group, and risk flags that came with a proposed fix attached rather than just a problem statement. The biweekly sprint reviews kept our stakeholders in the loop without requiring them to sit in on every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Both, yes. One sprint hit a one-week delay from a third-party API dependency outside anyone's control. The team flagged it three weeks ahead of time, laid out two options, and we picked an approach that clawed the schedule back within the same sprint. That's the kind of foresight that separates real project management from just reacting to problems.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the ERP Development work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The team stayed the same the whole way through. The engineers in the discovery sessions were the same ones who built the system. That continuity matters more than people expect, and you really only notice it when it's missing. Every conversation picked up where the last one left off.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Without reservation. We're already in early conversations about a second engagement, and I expect this to turn into a multi-year relationship. Anyone in Media & Entertainment looking for real ERP Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout
Marcus Teo / CTO | Jan 08, 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
Cross-agency data sharing had been stuck for years because of incompatible systems. A secure integration layer was the prerequisite for nearly everything else on our roadmap.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Industry-Specific Solutions |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Feb 2025 - Nov 2025 |
| Business Type: | Government & Public Sector |
|---|---|
| Location: | Singapore |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Sentosa Ventures Pte Ltd is a Government & Public Sector business headquartered in Singapore. As CTO I'm responsible for the whole technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and how we pick vendors. Every decision we make on the technology side has to tie back to a clear business case before it gets approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our previous vendor had maintained this platform for a few years, and the technical debt had piled up to the point where our delivery speed had dropped to a fraction of what it used to be. We needed fresh engineering eyes and an actual plan to deal with the underlying mess.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Mainly Industry-Specific Solutions, with some adjacent architecture and QA work folded in. They owned the whole thing from requirements to go-live, including hooking it into four of our existing systems. Not needing a second vendor to cover that ground was genuinely useful, both cost-wise and logistically.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A peer in the Government & Public Sector space had used them for something similar in Industry-Specific Solutions and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Industry-Specific Solutions depth, and a track record of actually delivering — that combination made the decision easy.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Really well, partly because they already had Government & Public Sector experience that cut down on the amount of context we had to provide. They knew the terminology, asked the right questions, and translated our business requirements into technical specs accurately enough that development barely needed any clarification cycles.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Genuinely excellent, especially given the time difference between Singapore and the delivery team. Written updates were consistent and specific, anything needing a decision got same-day turnaround, and nothing slipped through the cracks across the whole engagement.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. I'd quietly built in some contingency given the complexity and the number of integrations involved, and none of it ended up being needed. Delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice was within a rounding error of the approved budget — rarer than most people in this industry would admit.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Industry-Specific Solutions work are solid: session duration up, conversion up, error rate down, and our NPS for that touchpoint has moved noticeably. Our account managers say it's coming up positively in client conversations now too.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for never losing the business goal in the middle of technical decisions. I've worked with technically strong teams before who lose that thread once things get complicated. This team kept every architectural call tied back to the outcome we'd actually agreed to, which made the harder trade-off conversations a lot easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Government & Public Sector network, both times to people facing Industry-Specific Solutions problems similar to ours. I made those referrals confidently because I know the experience I had was repeatable, not a one-off stroke of luck on our project.
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.
What C9 charges comes down to a handful of variables — how complex the project is, the number of development hours involved, the tech stack required, team size, and which engagement model you pick. Based on available data, C9's typical hourly rate is around N/A.
Generally, yes — companies like C9 tend to work well with startups because of what they typically offer: MVP builds, product strategy input, architecture that can scale later, and dedicated teams that keep costs manageable while still moving fast. For context, its listed capabilities span Branding, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
It depends heavily on scope. A lean MVP might be a matter of weeks, while a full enterprise system or a larger digital transformation project can stretch into months once you factor in development, testing, and deployment. With a team of N/A professionals, C9 can scale resources based on project urgency.
Most businesses reach C9 through its website, a direct email, or a contact form — any of which works for discussing what you need, booking an initial conversation, or asking for a rough estimate. For context, its listed capabilities span Branding, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it has been operating since N/A.
Plenty of modern software teams, C9 included, now build real AI and machine learning features — chatbots, predictive models, computer vision, and automation that goes beyond simple rule-based scripts. For context, it has experience across industries such as Aerospace & Defense, Sports & Fitness, Government & Public Sector, Financial Services, Energy & Utilities and Human Resources, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
Most professional shops, including C9, expect to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement before getting into specifics — it's a fairly standard ask and a reasonable one to make before sharing anything sensitive. For context, its listed capabilities span Branding, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
C9 isn't necessarily limited to one region and may take on clients across several countries, depending on market demand and business partnerships.
It's a common line of work for a company like C9 — multi-tenant architecture, subscription billing hooked up properly, and cloud-native deployment built for a product meant to scale as a service rather than a one-off build. For context, it has experience across industries such as Aerospace & Defense, Sports & Fitness, Government & Public Sector, Financial Services, Energy & Utilities and Human Resources, and its listed capabilities span Branding, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development.
Modernizing legacy software is usually within scope for a firm like C9 — re-platforming, refactoring old code, and moving things onto current frameworks or cloud infrastructure without necessarily rebuilding everything from zero. For context, its listed capabilities span Branding, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
C9 generally runs something close to a standard structured process — requirements gathering, UI/UX design, development in agile sprints, QA testing along the way, deployment, and support once it's live. For context, it has experience across industries such as Aerospace & Defense, Sports & Fitness, Government & Public Sector, Financial Services, Energy & Utilities and Human Resources, and its listed capabilities span Branding, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development.
