About this website
Wearegoat puts three decisions near the top of its homepage: view the work, check prices or make contact. That direct introduction suits a London website design and development studio whose portfolio ranges from publishing systems to interactive exhibitions. The business dates to 2012, and its website publishes UK and Malta contact details.
The project descriptions explain what visitors can do, not simply what a finished page looks like. For FARFETCH’s Imagined Futures collaboration with Gucci, the studio describes three digital worlds with product hotspots, layered movement and alternative starting points. The work belongs in the same conversation as these editorial and interactive website examples: layout becomes part of the experience rather than a neutral frame. That is a more specific demonstration of its design approach than a collection of brand logos.
The Art Newspaper case study reveals the software work behind that visual emphasis. Wearegoat describes a relationship beginning in 2015, including website development, a content management system and migration of three decades of material. Its later publishing platform combined manually curated and automatically assembled article collections. Editors could vary the number of stories in a module without having to reconstruct the page around a rigid template. The important distinction is between making pages look different and giving a publishing team practical control over how stories are presented. The account explains the latter, although it does not establish independently measured improvements in readership or revenue.
For Bridgette Ashton’s Artificialia, the design problem was different again: presenting a collection of more than 70 sculptural objects online. The studio documents using still photographs as previews, with individual 3D models loading only after a click or tap. Among culture and education website designs, this is a useful example of matching interaction to the material being presented. The case study explicitly connects the loading decision with mobile bandwidth considerations, while the exhibition’s own website credits Wearegoat as its developer.
The pricing page provides a practical counterweight to these bespoke projects. It separates landing pages and promotional websites from digital experiences quoted individually, and says prices become fixed once the brief is confirmed. The listed packages identify Webflow, a content management system, documentation and one month of support after launch. This gives prospective clients concrete inclusions to discuss rather than only an invitation to request an estimate.
There is also a clear limitation to the portfolio: its introduction directs visitors to the studio’s Awwwards profile for newer work. The company therefore acknowledges that its own project archive is not necessarily current. The published cases remain useful explanations of design decisions, but should not be treated as a complete account of recent delivery.
The contact page continues the direct approach, inviting an email about the business and its goals rather than requiring a lengthy questionnaire. Visualmodo’s guide to defining a website proposal and project scope offers useful context for the next conversation. For a studio combining packaged sites with custom systems, buyers should establish which features, integrations, revisions and ongoing support belong in the agreed work.
Wearegoat is most relevant to publishers, cultural organisations and brands seeking a distinctive website with a specific operational purpose. Its documented work gives particular substance to enquiries about editorial tools, campaign experiences and digital exhibitions, while its published Webflow packages provide a separate route for more conventional promotional sites.