Details
| Founded: | N/A |
|---|---|
| Hourly Rates: | N/A |
| Employees: | N/A |
| Avg. Project Cost: | $10,000+ |
| Ratings: |
4.3
8 Reviews
|
Industries Served
Aerospace & Defense
Construction
Gaming & Gambling
Insurance
Retail & E-commerce
Sports & Fitness
About
Stoller & Company remains trust that their customers begin things out & there is not a viable option for the class of service. Their services & solutions cover emerging technologies, constant learning, change and each possible work that would give to the success of their clients. They remain trust that their customers begin things out & there is not a viable option for the class of service.
Stoller & Company Reviews
4.3
8 Reviews
The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved
Tanner Ridgeway / VP of Operations Technology | Jun 05, 2026The 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
Years of incremental patches had left us with a platform that technically worked but was quietly holding the business back strategically. A proper rebuild was the agreed way forward.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Industry-Specific Solutions |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $10,000 to $49,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jan 2026 - Apr 2026 |
| Business Type: | Aerospace & Defense |
|---|---|
| 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 Aerospace & Defense 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?
Regulation in our Aerospace & Defense segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Industry-Specific Solutions 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?
The scope ran the full Industry-Specific Solutions 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 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?
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?
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.
Performance testing caught a latency problem three weeks ahead of our busiest traffic day
Anjali Raghunathan / VP of Data Science | May 18, 2026Five 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
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 |
| 5.0 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 5.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Construction |
|---|---|
| Location: | Seattle, USA |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As VP of Data Science at Clearwave Analytics Inc I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Construction operations out of Seattle, 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 Quality Assurance & Testing 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 Quality Assurance & Testing, 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 Construction space had used them for something similar in Quality Assurance & Testing and recommended them without hesitation. Our own due diligence backed that up. Domain knowledge, Quality Assurance & Testing 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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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.
Treated our product's quality like it was their own reputation on the line
Sameer Kapoor / Chief Data Officer | Apr 11, 2026Five 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
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 |
| 4.5 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Quality Assurance & Testing |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Gaming & Gambling |
|---|---|
| Location: | Gurugram, India |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Chief Data Officer at Meridian FinServ Ltd I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Gaming & Gambling operations out of Gurugram, 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 Gaming & Gambling, but not the internal engineering depth to actually execute it. The Quality Assurance & Testing 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 Quality Assurance & Testing, 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 Quality Assurance & Testing approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Gaming & Gambling — 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 Gaming & Gambling 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?
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?
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 Quality Assurance & Testing program in Gaming & Gambling and expect them to actually deliver against the brief, this is the team.
A partner who guarded our roadmap the way we would have guarded it ourselves
Franziska Wagner / Chief Innovation Officer | Mar 21, 2026Our 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
Our actuarial models had outgrown the reporting pipeline feeding them, and the resulting data lag was introducing real risk into pricing decisions the business wasn't comfortable carrying anymore.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Software Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Apr 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Insurance |
|---|---|
| Location: | Frankfurt, Germany |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Chief Innovation Officer at Elbtal Digital AG I oversee technology spend and delivery across our Insurance operations out of Frankfurt, 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?
Regulation in our Insurance segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Software Development 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?
The core of it was Software 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?
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?
Hard to isolate perfectly given everything else going on in the business, but the numbers we can attribute directly to the Software 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?
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 Insurance looking for real Software Development depth paired with actual delivery discipline should have this team near the top of their list.
Smart contract audit was rigorous enough that our legal team signed off without a single note
Agnieszka Zielińska / CTO | Mar 05, 2026Looking 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
Expanding internationally meant we suddenly needed multi-currency, multi-language, and multi-warehouse support that our existing platform simply wasn't architected for.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.0 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Blockchain Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jul 2025 - Feb 2026 |
| Business Type: | Retail & E-commerce |
|---|---|
| Location: | Poznań, Poland |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
Bug Tech Studio is a Retail & E-commerce business headquartered in Poznań, Poland. 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?
Regulation in our Retail & E-commerce segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Blockchain Development 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?
Mainly Blockchain 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?
Really well, partly because they already had Retail & E-commerce 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?
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 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 Retail & E-commerce network, both times to people facing Blockchain 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.
The return on this investment outpaced the business case we originally approved
Ananya Raman / Director of Engineering | Feb 11, 2026I went into this engagement genuinely skeptical. A previous vendor had left us with a system that technically worked but that nobody trusted, and I wasn't interested in repeating that experience. This team earned trust the slow way — solid discovery documentation, technical proposals that held up under scrutiny, sprints that landed when promised, and ultimately a production system that has simply behaved. I don't open conversations about them with caveats anymore.
Project summary
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.
| 4.0 Overall Rating |
| 3.5 Quality |
| 3.5 Schedule |
| 3.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Low-Code / No-Code Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $500,000+ |
| Project Duration: | Aug 2025 - Nov 2025 |
| Business Type: | Sports & Fitness |
|---|---|
| Location: | Kochi, India |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Bridgeway Ventures, a growth-stage Sports & Fitness company based in Kochi, India. My role as Director of 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 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 scope ran the full Low-Code / No-Code Development 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 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?
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?
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 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?
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.
Technically sharp, commercially sensible, and genuinely easy to work with throughout
Faisal Al-Dosari / Head of Innovation | Jan 21, 2026The 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
Expanding internationally meant we suddenly needed multi-currency, multi-language, and multi-warehouse support that our existing platform simply wasn't architected for.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 4.0 Schedule |
| 4.0 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Low-Code / No-Code Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $150,000 to $499,999 |
| Project Duration: | Jun 2025 - Oct 2025 |
| Business Type: | Retail & E-commerce |
|---|---|
| Location: | Dammam, Saudi Arabia |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Oasis Tech Ventures, a growth-stage Retail & E-commerce company based in Dammam, Saudi Arabia. My role as Head of Innovation 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 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 Low-Code / No-Code 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 Low-Code / No-Code Development approach was specific rather than generic, backed by actual reference projects in Retail & E-commerce — 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?
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?
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 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 Retail & E-commerce 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.
Multiplayer infrastructure held through a launch-day spike we hadn't fully planned for
Femke Visser / Head of Platform Engineering | Jan 19, 2026Our 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
Our internal engineering capacity was fully committed to keeping existing systems running, with no room for a build of this size. An outside partner with the right depth was really our only option.
| 4.5 Overall Rating |
| 4.5 Quality |
| 5.0 Schedule |
| 4.5 Project Cost |
| 5.0 Willing To Refer |
| Project Type: | Game Development |
|---|---|
| Project Cost: | $50,000 to $149,999 |
| Project Duration: | Feb 2025 - Dec 2025 |
| Business Type: | Aerospace & Defense |
|---|---|
| Location: | The Hague, Netherlands |
Questions & Answers
Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I run technology for Polder Digital BV, a growth-stage Aerospace & Defense company based in The Hague, Netherlands. My role as Head 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?
Regulation in our Aerospace & Defense segment shifted and the compliance deadline came from the regulator, not from us. The scale of the Game Development 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?
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 Aerospace & Defense 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?
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?
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?
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 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 Aerospace & Defense looking for real Game 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.
Stoller & Company typically covers the standard range of software development work — mobile apps, web platforms, custom internal tools, UI/UX design, cloud infrastructure, AI integrations, and larger enterprise builds. Its core focus areas include Mobile App Development, SEO, Social Media Marketing, UI-UX Design and Web Development.
Generally, yes — companies like Stoller & Company 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, it has experience across industries such as Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications, and it has been operating since N/A.
The exact stack shifts by project, but Stoller & Company commonly works across things like React, Angular, Vue.js, Node.js, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Flutter, React Native, native iOS and Android, and cloud platforms like AWS and Azure. For context, its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, SEO, Social Media Marketing, UI-UX Design and Web Development, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.
When you're weighing up a software partner such as Stoller & Company, 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, its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, SEO, Social Media Marketing, UI-UX Design and Web Development, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
Usually, yes — a dedicated developer arrangement is a common option with firms like Stoller & Company, 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 Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications, and its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, SEO, Social Media Marketing, UI-UX Design and Web Development.
Most companies structured like Stoller & Company 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, it has experience across industries such as Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.
Plenty of modern software teams, Stoller & Company 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, its listed capabilities span Mobile App Development, SEO, Social Media Marketing, UI-UX Design and Web Development, and it has experience across industries such as Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications.
It's a common line of work for a company like Stoller & Company — 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 Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications, and its typical hourly rate is around N/A.
Modernizing legacy software is usually within scope for a firm like Stoller & Company — re-platforming, refactoring old code, and moving things onto current frameworks or cloud infrastructure without necessarily rebuilding everything from zero. For context, it has experience across industries such as Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
The most reliable route is giving Stoller & Company 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, it has experience across industries such as Real Estate, Environmental Services, Legal Services, Healthcare, Insurance and Telecommunications, and it reports a team size of N/A professionals.
