How long does a website take — agency says 2 months, is that realistic?

Speaking from 15 years in this industry: 70% of the time, a 2-month project turning into 5 months is completely on the client. Agency presents the mockup, internal managers spend 3 weeks arguing over colors, English product copy takes forever to get translated and sent over. If you have your content ready to go, 2 months is totally doable.

To keep the timeline on track, put these 3 ground rules in the contract: 1) Once visual design is signed off, no new design revisions can be requested during development. 2) Product photos and translations must be handed over to the agency by the start of week 5 at the latest. 3) Feedback turnaround for both parties is capped at 48 hours max.

When we built a similar site with 200 products, we agreed on 8 weeks with the agency. We delayed the English technical catalogs and images by two weeks, and they slipped two weeks due to a bug in the catalog filtering logic; overall it wrapped in exactly 13 weeks. Two months only works if you have literally everything prepped and organized in folders.

Bilingual support and a filtering system for 150 products will require extra database architecture and testing time on the backend. Just properly setting up form notifications, URL structures, and SEO tags for both languages is easily at least two weeks of dev work alone. If they're saying 2 months, the timeline for these technical tests is going to be extremely tight.

To an agency, "1 week" on the schedule really means "however long it takes to hear back from you." If your CEO spends 15 days agonizing over the right shade of blue for a button, that 2-month timeline will easily drag out past New Year's.

Are the English technical specs and size charts for all 150 products already sitting in a digital format ready to go, or will you be writing them from scratch while the agency works on the design? If they aren't ready, 2 months is totally out of the question.

To avoid delays, assign just one person from your company as the project lead. If the agency has to deal with a different department or partner every day, the whole process will grind to a halt. With a single point of contact, 8 weeks is actually very manageable.

the cheap-looking path usually ends up costing more later and every "we'll look at it later" in a meeting means unbilled work.

implementing a change request process doesn't slow things down, it speeds them up. if I were you I'd go this route.

I have a question don't want to go off-topic though. anyway taking notes for two weeks yields better results than a six-month estimate.

Hope this helps.

I don't think this advice fits everyone. When making a decision, first look at what data you have on hand.

If you post the result here, it will help others too.

There's a common mistake people make when doing this. The real issue isn't the number, but what it's based on.

I'm also curious if anyone does it differently.

We need to take it step by step. Solutions that work at a small scale collapse when you grow; I learned this late.

If I were you I'd go this route.

the answer above hits the nail on the head. btw mistakes made on the how long does a website take side are usually reversible but expensive.

if you have questions, write them; Ill answer as best I can.

I agree. Taking notes for two weeks yields better results than a six-month estimate.

Hope this helps.

Let me share my experience. Mistakes made on the how long does a website take side are usually reversible but expensive.

If you post the result here, it will help others too.

The opposite happened to me, that's why I'm writing. Implementing a change request process doesn't slow things down, it speeds them up.

If code ownership isn't in the contract, you have no bargaining power when leaving. Proven by experience.

Correct. Everyone rushing into how long does a website take gets stuck at the same point.

That's all, sorry if I went on too long.

Saved.