Raveka

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
N/A
Hourly Rates:
N/A
Employees:
N/A
Avg. Project Cost:
$50,000+
Ratings:
4.2 8 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • App Marketing

Industries Served

Automotive Aerospace & Defense Financial Services Mining & Metals Information Technology Real Estate Government & Public Sector

Where We Specialize

17% Web Development
Web Development 17%
Entertainment 16%
Mobile App Development 15%
E-commerce Development 14%
Cloud Computing Services 12%
Wordpress 12%
Iwatch 7%
Blockchain Development 5%
Progressive Web App 2%

Industry Expertise

Entertainment100%

Typical Project Size

48% Small Business
28% Enterprise
24% Midmarket Business

About

Businesses looking for a reliable technology partner often consider Raveka. Raveka focuses on Web Development. The average project on record costs around $25,000. These details offer a useful starting point when evaluating Raveka.

Raveka Reviews

4.2 8 Reviews
Submit Review

Modules built around how we actually operate instead of forcing us to change our process

Delphine Rousseau / Director of Platform Engineering | Jun 02, 2026

What 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

Our connected vehicle platform needed to handle telemetry from a growing EV fleet while also managing over-the-air update rollouts, and nothing off the shelf handled both well.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
ERP Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Jun 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Automotive
Location:
Vancouver, Canada

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Pacific Crest Ventures, a growth-stage Automotive company based in Vancouver, Canada. My role as Director of Platform Engineering 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?
Our ERP 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 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?
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?
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?
Genuinely excellent, especially given the time difference between Vancouver, Canada 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?
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?
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?
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 ERP Development program in Automotive and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Our distributed team has effectively adopted the virtual space as its default meeting room

Roisin Cassidy / VP of Product Engineering | May 05, 2026

Five months post-launch, we're running at roughly double the transaction volume we'd specified in the original scope document, and the platform hasn't needed a single structural change to handle it. That's the real tell for whether a team designed for what you told them versus what you were actually going to need. We're now scoping a second phase and I expect this to be a multi-year relationship at this point.

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.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 3.5
  • Schedule 3.5
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AR/VR Development
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
May 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Aerospace & Defense
Location:
Belfast, UK

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Silverbrook Digital Ltd is a Aerospace & Defense business headquartered in Belfast, UK. As VP of Product Engineering 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 AR/VR 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 AR/VR 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 AR/VR Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Aerospace & Defense — 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 Aerospace & Defense 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?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the AR/VR 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?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Aerospace & Defense network, both times to people facing AR/VR 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.

Marketing now ships page updates themselves — no engineering ticket required anymore

Agnieszka Zielińska / CTO | Apr 23, 2026

I 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

New open banking rules meant our API layer needed rebuilding from scratch, with compliance designed in from the start rather than patched on afterward.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 5.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Web Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Sep 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Financial Services
Location:
Poznań, Poland

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As CTO at Bug Tech Studio I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Financial Services operations out of Poznań, Poland. 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 Financial Services, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Web 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 Web 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?
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?
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?
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?
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.

Turned years of siloed spreadsheets into one dataset people actually trust

Tanner Ridgeway / VP of Operations Technology | Apr 03, 2026

Looking back, the thing that stands out most is how uneventful the whole project was. Technology projects of this size tend to generate their share of fire drills and awkward escalation calls. This one really didn't. Issues got flagged early enough that they never became incidents, scope changes went through an actual process instead of a tense phone call, and risks were tracked rather than just hoped away. That kind of quiet competence is unusual in my experience, and it made the whole thing feel easier on our end than I know it was on theirs.

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.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 3.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Data & Analytics
Project Cost:
$50,000 to $149,999
Project Duration:
Nov 2025 - Mar 2026
Business Type:
Mining & Metals
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 Mining & Metals 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?
We had a clear product direction for our next stage of growth in Mining & Metals, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Data & Analytics 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 Data & Analytics 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 Data & Analytics approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Mining & Metals — 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 Mining & Metals 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?
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 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?
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 Mining & Metals network, both times to people facing Data & Analytics 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.

Optimized for actual business outcomes instead of the usual vanity metrics

Nicolas Fontaine / Directeur Technique | Feb 17, 2026

This 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

We hold vendors to the same standard our own clients hold us to, so the bar for this engagement was never going to be low. We needed a partner comfortable being measured against it.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Digital Marketing
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Apr 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Information Technology
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 Information Technology 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?
The core of it was Digital Marketing, 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 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 Digital Marketing 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?
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?
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 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?
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 Digital Marketing depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

Had something running in production for the board to see inside of two months

Airi Kobayashi / Head of Product Development | Jan 14, 2026

The easiest thing to praise is the technical output itself — solid test coverage, a deployment pipeline that just works, documentation that people actually reference instead of ignoring. But what I keep coming back to is the number of conversations we haven't had to have since launch. No 2am incident calls. No emergency patches. No post-mortems about what went sideways. That absence is really the whole pitch, if you ask me.

Project summary

Buyer behavior had gone fully digital-first and our search experience had quietly become a liability. It needed to match the quality of the listings it was supposed to represent.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AI & Machine Learning
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Apr 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:
Real Estate
Location:
Nagoya, Japan

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Head of Product Development at Rising Sun Commerce KK I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Real Estate operations out of Nagoya, 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?
Our AI & Machine Learning 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?
Full AI & Machine Learning delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
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 AI & Machine Learning approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Real Estate — 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?
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?
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?
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 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?
Yes, no hesitation. I've already referred them twice within my own Real Estate network, both times to people facing AI & Machine Learning 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.

The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved

Margaux Lefèvre / Head of Digital Products | Jan 12, 2026

What 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

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.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
POS System Development
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
Feb 2025 - Dec 2025
Business Type:
Government & Public Sector
Location:
Nice, France

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Horizon Digital SAS, a growth-stage Government & Public Sector company based in Nice, France. My role as Head of Digital Products 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 POS System 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?
Full POS System Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
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?
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?
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 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 POS System Development program in Government & Public Sector and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Execution matched the proposal on every dimension that actually mattered to us

Henrik Schuster / VP of Technology | Jan 05, 2026

This 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

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.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Embedded Systems Development
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Feb 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:
Aerospace & Defense
Location:
Bremen, Germany

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Technology at NordWelle Logistik GmbH I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Aerospace & Defense operations out of Bremen, Germany. 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?
Full Embedded Systems Development delivery, with particular depth on the integration and data migration pieces — the riskiest parts of the whole program. On top of that, they kept a dedicated QA person on the project throughout and left our operations team with a proper runbook at handover.
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 Embedded Systems Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Aerospace & Defense — 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 Aerospace & Defense 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?
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?
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?
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 Aerospace & Defense looking for real Embedded Systems Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Got questions about our specialized technology solutions? We have the answers to help you make informed decisions.

What Raveka 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, Raveka's typical hourly rate is around N/A.

Raveka has delivered projects across a range of different industries, including Logistics & Supply Chain, Food & Beverage, Real Estate, Insurance, Human Resources and Fashion & Apparel.

Generally, yes — companies like Raveka 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 App Marketing, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and it has experience across industries such as Logistics & Supply Chain, Food & Beverage, Real Estate, Insurance, Human Resources and Fashion & Apparel.

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, Raveka can scale resources based on project urgency.

That depends on where Raveka is based and who they primarily serve — some firms like this operate fully offshore, some are local-first, and plenty run a hybrid model that mixes both. For context, it has experience across industries such as Logistics & Supply Chain, Food & Beverage, Real Estate, Insurance, Human Resources and Fashion & Apparel, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.

Usually, yes — a dedicated developer arrangement is a common option with firms like Raveka, where you get engineers working exclusively on your project as an extension of your in-house team rather than as a separate outsourced unit. For context, it has experience across industries such as Logistics & Supply Chain, Food & Beverage, Real Estate, Insurance, Human Resources and Fashion & Apparel, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.

Plenty of modern software teams, Raveka 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 Logistics & Supply Chain, Food & Beverage, Real Estate, Insurance, Human Resources and Fashion & Apparel, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.

Raveka 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 Raveka — 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, its listed capabilities span App Marketing, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.

The most reliable route is giving Raveka a clear, specific brief up front — through their website form, a direct email, or a call — since a vague ask tends to get a vague answer back, while a concrete one usually gets a proper estimate. For context, its listed capabilities span App Marketing, Mobile App Development and Web Development, and it has experience across industries such as Logistics & Supply Chain, Food & Beverage, Real Estate, Insurance, Human Resources and Fashion & Apparel.
Get Listed