Snoop

Visit Website Write a Review Claim this Company

Details

Founded:
2000
Hourly Rates:
$25 - $49 / hr
Employees:
50 - 249
Avg. Project Cost:
$50,000+
Ratings:
4.1 6 Reviews

Services

  • Mobile App Development
  • Web Development
  • UI-UX Design
  • Web Design
  • Internet of Things

Industries Served

Agriculture Logistics & Supply Chain Telecommunications Mining & Metals Energy & Utilities Manufacturing

Where We Specialize

12% Bot Development
Bot Development 12%
Productivity 11%
Software Development 10%
Testing Services 10%
AI Development 10%
Web3 10%
No Code/ Low Code 8%
Web Design 7%
IT Services 6%
Game Development 5%
Mobile App Development 4%
Graphic Design 4%
IoT Development 2%
Big Data Analytics 1%

Industry Expertise

Sports63% Insurance37%

Typical Project Size

57% Enterprise
24% Small Business
19% Midmarket Business

About

Businesses looking for a reliable technology partner often consider Snoop. Snoop focuses on Mobile App Development and Web Development. Snoop employs 50 - 249 people. Typical hourly rates run around $25 - $49 / hr/hr, with an average project cost near $10,000. The team is based in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Overall, Snoop is one of the options worth shortlisting for a technology project.

Snoop Reviews

4.1 6 Reviews
Submit Review

Took our security posture from a known weakness to something we now lead with in sales calls

Ananya Raman / Director of Engineering | Jun 10, 2026

We 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 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 3.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Cybersecurity
Project Cost:
$10,000 to $49,999
Project Duration:
Aug 2025 - May 2026
Business Type:
Agriculture
Location:
Kochi, India

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Director of Engineering at Bridgeway Ventures I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Agriculture operations out of Kochi, India. 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?
Regulation in our Agriculture segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Cybersecurity changes required justified bringing in a specialist rather than pulling our internal team off the product roadmap to handle it.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Full Cybersecurity 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?
A peer in the Agriculture space had used them for something similar in Cybersecurity and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Cybersecurity 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?
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 Cybersecurity program in Agriculture and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.

Gave us an honest read of where we stood, then a credible plan to move from there

Ritika Bhattacharya / VP of Product | May 09, 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

Track-and-trace had gone from a nice-to-have to something every RFP now required, and our platform simply didn't have it. We needed to close that gap before our next tender round.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
IT Consulting
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Oct 2025 - Apr 2026
Business Type:
Logistics & Supply Chain
Location:
Ahmedabad, India

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Product at Vantara Tech Pvt Ltd I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Logistics & Supply Chain operations out of Ahmedabad, India. 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 Logistics & Supply Chain, 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?
Full IT Consulting 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?
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?
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?
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 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 Logistics & Supply Chain network, both times to people facing IT Consulting 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.

Multiplayer infrastructure held through a launch-day spike we hadn't fully planned for

Angus Fairbanks / Chief Digital Officer | Apr 15, 2026

We 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.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 3.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Game Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Apr 2025 - Jan 2026
Business Type:
Telecommunications
Location:
Brisbane, Australia

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Coral Coast Technology, a growth-stage Telecommunications company based in Brisbane, Australia. My role as Chief Digital Officer 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 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?
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?
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 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?
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.

Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout

Marc-Antoine Girard / VP of Innovation | Mar 26, 2026

We 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

A previous project had worked fine in staging and fallen apart in production. We approached vendor selection this time with a lot more scrutiny as a direct result.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 4.0
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 3.5
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
Industry-Specific Solutions
Project Cost:
$500,000+
Project Duration:
Jul 2025 - Feb 2026
Business Type:
Mining & Metals
Location:
Montreal, Canada

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Innovation at Laurier Tech Partners I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Mining & Metals operations out of Montreal, Canada. 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 Industry-Specific Solutions 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 Industry-Specific Solutions 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?
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?
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?
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 Mining & Metals looking for real Industry-Specific Solutions depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.

The immersive demo generated more press coverage than anything we'd shipped in years

Anton Berggren / Chief Technology Officer | Jan 28, 2026

Our stakeholder list for this project included board members, operations leads, compliance, and end users, all with wildly different levels of technical fluency and different definitions of success. Managing that mix well is genuinely hard, and this team did it better than any vendor we've worked with. They shifted register depending on who they were talking to without ever dumbing down the substance, kept expectations honest the whole way through, and delivered something each group could point to as meeting their own bar. That range is rare.

Project summary

Grid modernization funding required us to prove demand-response capability. The models existed on paper — we needed engineers to actually build and run them in production.

  • Overall Rating 4.5
  • Quality 4.5
  • Schedule 4.5
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
AR/VR Development
Project Cost:
$150,000 to $499,999
Project Duration:
Jan 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:
Energy & Utilities
Location:
Malmö, Sweden

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Baltic Cloud AB has been operating in Energy & Utilities for a while now, headquartered in Malmö, Sweden. As Chief Technology Officer I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
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 AR/VR 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?
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?
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?
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?
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.

Scaled from a ten-unit pilot to full fleet deployment without a single architectural rework

Elin Holmqvist / Head of Product Engineering | Jan 14, 2026

We 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

Unplanned downtime had become our biggest single cost line, and our own data suggested predictive maintenance could fix most of it — if we had the infrastructure to act on the signal.

  • Overall Rating 4.0
  • Quality 3.5
  • Schedule 4.0
  • Project Cost 4.0
  • Willing To Refer 5.0
Project Type:
IoT Development
Project Cost:
Less than $10,000
Project Duration:
Feb 2025 - Nov 2025
Business Type:
Manufacturing
Location:
Uppsala, Sweden

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Vinter Digital AB has been operating in Manufacturing for a while now, headquartered in Uppsala, Sweden. As Head of Product Engineering I sit across both strategic planning and day-to-day technology delivery. We hold our vendors to a high bar because our own clients hold us to one — it's only fair to expect the same discipline from partners.
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 IoT 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?
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?
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?
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.
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

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

What Snoop 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, Snoop's typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Generally, yes — companies like Snoop 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 Internet of Things, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

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 50 - 249 professionals, Snoop can scale resources based on project urgency.

Most businesses reach Snoop 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 Internet of Things, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

When you're weighing up a software partner such as Snoop, it's worth looking past the pitch and checking the portfolio, what past clients say, relevant industry background, technical range, how they communicate, pricing structure, project management style, and what support looks like after launch. For context, it has experience across industries such as Legal Services, Mining & Metals, Food & Beverage, Gaming & Gambling, Energy & Utilities and Nonprofit & NGO, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Most companies structured like Snoop give you a choice between a fixed-price contract, a dedicated team arrangement, or time-and-materials billing, so you can pick whichever lines up with your budget and how well-defined your scope already is. For context, its listed capabilities span Internet of Things, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of 50 - 249 professionals.

Plenty of modern software teams, Snoop 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 Legal Services, Mining & Metals, Food & Beverage, Gaming & Gambling, Energy & Utilities and Nonprofit & NGO, and it has been operating since 2000.

It's a common line of work for a company like Snoop — 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 Legal Services, Mining & Metals, Food & Beverage, Gaming & Gambling, Energy & Utilities and Nonprofit & NGO, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.

Snoop 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, its listed capabilities span Internet of Things, Mobile App Development, UI-UX Design, Web Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
Get Listed