I tried a web designer once, years ago, because I though that it would save time and result in a better website.

We had huge problems because he wasn't flexible enough to alter the appearance of the site so that it appealed to female shoppers over 30. He had one idea, very plain, very corporate, with lo contrast between the the type and that background page color.

He wanted things to look corporate, I wanted the site to be pleasing to the anticipated user.

Is this a common problem? Isn't it better to build a site that considers the viewer instead of sticking to a concept for a narrow set of circumstances?

That's why I go with companies that go with custom websites. They let you choose the colors, icons, pictures and overall display. I never had a problem with mine, I chose almost anything and we worked together as a team.

The viewer should be the primary consideration in a sale, what's the point of making something not appealing. You'll end up losing ivestment.

Then I must have run into an extremely stubborn, or inexperienced designer.

The one benefit I got from the experience, though, was that it inspired me to learn a bit more about coding!

That exact same confusion was why i went t= with webstudio 4. It took all of that and turned it simple. Its free for 30 days and its great. well worth teh 50 bucks afterwards.

I honestly think that it is a common problem that the designer can not or will not put in the time to create what the customer desires, so just tries to pass off something half-way acceptable, in the hopes that the customer simply gives up and accepts the lower-quality site for full price.

I've personally had it happen twice, and still I don't have a site worth looking at.