Cost of buiding Website using React vs HTML

"I would apprecaite your take in advance."

What sort of web site is it?  What does it do?  How does your friend want the new site to be different from the existing site?

9k-19k is a big spread and I would always suggest getting more quotes, but without some very detailed information it's impossible to say if either number is excessive.

@Paul,

 

 Unfortunately I don't have all the details. However does developing a website using React cost more in general than doing the same in HTML?  

@Göran 

Thanks for the explanation and I appreciate it.

I am just curious what would be the justification for charing 10k more for using React. 

It is just another website development tool, as I see it.

One can say that he or she spent time to learn React; therefore, want more $$ in return?

 I used to program in Pascal, Cobol, C, Microsoft Access and FoxPro back in the day.

 I didn't charge extra because I used MS Access over FoxPro. What anyone would charge more because he or she is going to used React over HTML.

 I don't get it.

I would say use as little JS as necessary to create the desired features. Here are a few articles explaining some of the problems with using React.
https://dev.to/ender_minyard/why-you-should-stop-using-react-g7c
https://www.spicyweb.dev/the-great-gaslighting-of-the-js-age/
https://sam-redmond.com/why-we-need-to-stop-using-react-1ae3ec7959a4
https://www.zachleat.com/web/react-criticism/

First of all, there is not enough information in your question to try and justify anything.  On one extreme, you can have your friend create a site on Wix, Weebly or Squarespace on his own and just use a template that they have ready to go and just add your own content. It will not cost you anything except the $30 monthly fee and his own time. On the other end of the spectrum can be custom graphics, video, custom template, working with API's or other data sources, ecommerc etc.  And keep in mind the website is just the vehicle. What about content? Does the fee they are charging cover that as well?

To give little to no information and ask if $9K is a good or bad price and what about $10K more if done in React is not going to be helpful to you because there is nothing to base it on. And we don't know what the purpose of using React (or similar) would be used for. 

Start at the very end. What is the end goal?  Is it to sell $300,000 of widgets each year? or do you just need a few static pages to show that you are a legit business and have some pages for, "About" and "Contact".

I didn't charge extra because I used MS Access over FoxPro.

That is because they were essentially the same for a short time.  Again, we don't know what, "developing the site in React" means. Is there added functionality? In general, a static HTML site is just that. Page loads and there is no data source. This is going to be much easier to create. Using React (or Angular or Vue) is going to take a developer with more skill and that equals more pay and that converts to higher cost of production. It also may be that there is data involved and that will also convert to higher production costs. However, while a data driven site may cost more to create, it could very well mean lower costs to maintain because everytime a product changes,  you don't have to manually create or update or delete a page.

$10,000 is realistic if you are going to hire a real professional that may even work in a team with specialists for graphics, video, front end dev and back end dev. For the, "My friend has a kid that has a cousin that will do a hack job for $100" that is going to seem very high.

More details about the site's goals, what type of business, products etc is needed. 

@Scott,

 

 I understand that I need to provide more information about the website requirements for every's opinion.

 But you mentioned "Using React (or Angular or Vue) is going to take a developer with more skill and that equals more pay and that converts to higher cost of production." and that is what I wanted to hear. It is natural that you like to demand more compensation because it involves more skill.

 For example, setting up a server takes more effort and requires more skill than setting up a workstation PC; therefore I would charge more to set up a server.

"However does developing a website using React cost more in general than doing the same in HTML?"

The need for React may imply the web site is doing more than just sitting there - and the cost of a web site is almost always tied up in what it needs to do - so yes, a simple, static web site can be done very inexpensively while a complex, interactive web site can cost considerably more.

@Paul,

"a simple, static web site can be done very inexpensively while a complex, interactive web site can cost considerably more " --> I get that and that is the truth.

But my question is if you are the web programmer, you should know basic language like HTML, Java and additional tools such as Retro, Angular Vue ... etc.

Why would you charge more simply because you are using one of the programming tools?

Does it cost more to deply the website written in Retro?

Do they have to buy expensive software tools to run Retro? As I understand it, Retro is free.

For example, when I used to develop database-driven website, I chose to use COLDFUSION. But I had to learn COLDFUSION language in order to design a database driven website. But I did not pass on the cost of learning COLDFUSION  language and buying COLDFUSION software (to install it on my webserver) to my customer. 

I guess if Retro is free software and it is for anyone to learn, the vendor should not charge more simply because  Retro is used to design the website. 

And beyond just a different skill level, it would potentially take more time to use React (Angular or Vue) than a static site too.

One quote was 9k and will be developed using HTML. They also said, if React is used, it costs 10k more.

The fact is, there is a big gap of information missing. To just recreate the same 10 pages in React (Angular or Vue) for the sake of it, does not justify the end.I would bet there is a lot more missing information that could potentially justify what they are asking. 

I am not a web developer, but based on my research, React is more efficient than HTML.

This goes back to what I first said, start at the end. Start with the goal, whatever that might be. What will it take to achieve that goal? As you work your way down from the 30,000ft view of your goals down to the ground level, that is where a developer will make the determination of what to use. 

I personally would never give a quote that read, "$X for static HTML and $X + $Y if we use some library. Instead, I would find out what your goal is and come up with a plan. There is a big difference in a small business in a rural county that does $100,000 a year in sales vs a small business in a major city that does $1 Million in sales.

But my question is if you are the web programmer, you should know basic language like HTML, Java and additional tools such as Retro, Angular Vue ... etc.

Why would you charge more simply because you are using one of the programming tools?

Does it cost more to deply the website written in Retro?

Do they have to buy expensive software tools to run Retro? As I understand it, Retro is free.

Again, there is nothing to go on here. We do not know the details. It has nothing to do with what IDE you use because it can all be done in VSCode or any other IDE. It's about time and skill AND what you intend to do with making the pages interactive which is part of what React is all about. If you take out skill and assume a React Developer is the same as front end HTML/CSS developer or even HTML/CSS/JS, the things you would do to make the site interactive equates to more time. Like I said, there is not enough information here. You can't take it on face value that, "it is $10K more to do it in React" because that is not telling you anything and probably the telephone game of what your friend was told and then what he told you and what is being conveyed here. It is more likely, "It will be $10K more to make the site interactive with live, on-the-fly updates on both the main template and each of the 20 individual pages.

"I guess if Retro is free software and it is for anyone to learn, the vendor should not charge more simply because  Retro is used to design the website."

This is a cop-out.  If the effort invested in learning and perfecting one's skill in Retro amounts to nothing, your friend should simply learn Retro and do the job himself.  I can also get your friend a book on appendix removal should he ever need an appendectomy.  

All knowledge is free - you pay for experience.  My experience tells me the web site designer quoted the larger number because people tend to underestimate what they actually want - feature-creep is real - and the cost of a project is in the scope of the work.  Since we don't know the scope of the work, I can't explain either price quote but experience lets me make an educated guess.

I know it is difficult to tell whether 10k extra is worth the investment not knowing the scope of the project. I am with you on it.

Nonethless thank you all for your insight and I appreciate it.