Astro sites your team changes by asking.

Most marketing pages are the same for every visitor, so they can be built once and served as HTML. Astro does that by default and adds JavaScript only to the components that need it, which keeps pages light without anyone having to fight the framework.

Astro if every visitor sees the same pages. Next.js if the site has logins, reads live product data or shares React components with your app. I build both on one price list, and the first call usually settles which.

Yes, in Sanity. Editors change copy, images, posts and page sections there, and publishing rebuilds the site. What they cannot do is invent a new layout, which is the point: the design system holds.

On a static build, publishing in Sanity triggers a rebuild, which usually takes a minute or two. Pages that genuinely need to change instantly can be rendered on request instead; that gets decided page by page during scoping.

A move from another platform is fixed price from $5,000, quoted once after the inventory. A new build is scoped the same way. Ongoing work afterwards is $3,500 a month with no minimum term. The cost page breaks the bands down.

I do, all of it: scope, content model, design system, build, launch and the changes after. There is no handoff to a junior and no second team. The trade is capacity: there is no second team to absorb a rush, so scope and cost are agreed in writing before work starts. More on that.

On Cloudflare or Vercel, in your account. On Cloudflare, a mostly static marketing site often fits in the free tier. Sanity has its own plans, which depend on your team size and usage, and I check them against your editors during scoping.

Then the content is already structured in Sanity and the site is a normal repository, so a new front end can read the same content. Nothing is locked inside a builder.