Why We Don't Sell Retainers

Retainers sound like predictability: fixed amount, fixed scope, fixed calendar day. In practice they cover a risk neither side names openly - that nobody knows exactly what is worth doing next month.

What Retainers Actually Do

From two decades of software projects:

• Hours get "burned" up to the cap, even when doing nothing would have been the better call.
• Prioritisation conversations disappear, because the invoice goes out either way.
• New topics outside the retainer feel like an upsell - even when they are the most important.
• Cancellation becomes a political decision, not an operational one.

Our Model: Hourly, as Needed

Three simple rules:

1. Only billed time is delivered time. No base fee, no "expiring hours".
2. Weekly or monthly prioritisation. Whatever has the biggest leverage right now comes first. Whatever no longer creates value drops off.
3. Transparent documentation. Every hour connects to a commit, a decision, or a clean handover.

This is organisationally harder than a retainer. It forces both sides to plan the month. In exchange, trust stays intact - nobody ever pays hours for nothing.

Who This Fits - and Who It Doesn't

Good fit:

• Mid-sized companies with their own IT buying in expertise on demand
• Projects with fluctuating effort (sprints, releases, migration phases)
• Clients who want to control actual value delivered

Less fit:

• Procurement that needs a fixed annual figure on the books
• Projects where monthly prioritisation is organisationally impossible

What That Means for the First Call

On the first call we quote a realistic effort range - days, not packages. That lets both sides plan without forcing anyone into a rigid model. If the project turns out differently, we adjust prioritisation, not the invoice.

This is not a statement against retainers as such. It is a statement that transparency and prioritisation work better in our projects than a flat fee.