Custom design and build, with search and AI visibility handled at the structure level from day one rather than bolted on by a different vendor six months later.

The economics of the agency web market push almost everyone toward the same output: a purchased theme, lightly restyled, loaded with plugins to cover the gaps. It's fast to produce and it's why so many sites in this market load slowly, share the same layout, and perform badly in search.
The costs show up later and indirectly. Page weight that no amount of caching rescues. Markup that fights the crawler rather than helping it. A plugin stack that breaks when one dependency updates. And a structure nobody can change without the original builder.
Building custom sounds like a luxury and is mostly a decision about where the effort goes. We put it into structure first, semantic markup, correct heading hierarchy, real structured data, compressed assets, a URL architecture that makes sense to a machine, then design on top of that foundation rather than the other way around.
That ordering matters for AI search specifically. An assistant deciding whether to cite you is reading structure and specificity, not visual design. A beautiful site with no structured data is invisible to it.
Information architecture, URL scheme and heading hierarchy decided first, because retrofitting these later means redoing the design.
If you have a brand system we build to it precisely. If you don't, that's a separate conversation with its own scope rather than something we improvise.
No page builder, no purchased theme. Hand-built markup, which is why the pages weigh what they weigh.
Organization, Person, Service, FAQ, Breadcrumb, implemented during the build, validated, and consistent with what's visible on the page.
Image compression, no unnecessary framework weight, and a target we hold ourselves to rather than measure afterwards.
Actual browser testing at mobile, tablet and desktop, measured, not assumed from a design file.
Different product entirely. If a theme genuinely suits your needs we'll say so rather than sell you a custom build you don't need.
Structure retrofitted after design usually means redoing the design. It's the most common expensive mistake in this market.
Where a CMS makes sense you get one. For a brochure site it's often unnecessary overhead, and we'll tell you which you are.
You own the code on handover, in writing. Another developer can pick it up.
This site is the proof, and it's checkable rather than claimed. It's hand-built, it carries the schema described on this page, and its own AI-search score, 42 to 75, is published on the site with the audit log rather than described in a case study.
Yes, where it makes sense. For a brochure site it's often unnecessary overhead; for anything with listings, posts or a team roster it's essential. We'll be straight about which one you are rather than defaulting to the more expensive answer.
You do, on handover, in writing. Another developer can pick it up without us.
Yes. If you have a brand system we build to it. If you don't, we can build one, that's a separate scope with its own conversation.
Three to six weeks for a typical marketing site, depending on page count and how ready the content is. Content readiness is usually the real variable, not engineering.
For straightforward catalogues, yes. For complex multi-warehouse inventory and fulfilment, an established platform is usually the better answer and we'll say so.
Either a maintenance retainer or a documented handover to your team. We don't require the retainer.
Anqor is a small studio, so you deal with the person who builds it. If this isn't the right fit for your business, I'd rather say so on the first call than sell you something you don't need.
LinkedIn →Sometimes the honest answer is that yours needs fixing, not replacing. That's a cheaper conversation and we'd rather have it.