Preliminary Findings
While preparing this proposal, we ran a quick exploratory review of the French version of the public site. It doesn't replace a full audit, but it illustrates the kind of findings, and the potential gains, that a structured process would quantify across the whole catalog and purchase funnel. A preliminary Lighthouse run on the marketplace's mobile experience already puts numbers on the technical side:
Measured Baseline: Lighthouse (Mobile)
Understanding the Audit: the Scope
A 360° review organized around six complementary axes, covering ANKA's full web presence: the marketplace (marketplace.anka.africa) and the corporate site (anka.africa).
UX / UI & User Journeys
- Information architecture and navigation (desktop & mobile)
- End-to-end purchase funnel: search → product page → cart → checkout → confirmation
- Accessibility and secondary journeys (become a creator, favorites, account)
Technical & Performance
- Load times and Core Web Vitals (desktop & mobile), via standard performance tooling
- Systematic detection of dead links, empty pages and errors through a full site crawl
- Baseline security (HTTPS, security headers) and scalability against the catalog's volume
SEO & Visibility
- Indexation, URL structure, internal linking and structured data (schema.org)
- Content quality and uniqueness, multilingual keyword strategy (FR / EN / additional markets)
- Leveraging press coverage (Elle, Forbes, BBC Africa, Le Monde) in the netlinking strategy
Content & Brand Consistency
- Language consistency (FR/EN) across all journeys, including product pages
- Rebranding leftovers, typos, repetitions, consistency of visual templates
- Fit between editorial tone and the "premium diaspora" positioning
Security & Trust
- Clarity of guarantees (secure payment, return policy), credibility of customer reviews
- Transparency of seller profiles, legal notices, terms & conditions
- Personal-data compliance (GDPR and regional equivalents)
Conversion & Business Performance
- Catalog analysis (share of sponsored listings, wholesale/retail mix, price consistency)
- Conversion-funnel analysis and benchmark against 2–3 competing marketplaces
- Prioritization of recommendations by estimated business impact
The Audit, Step by Step
What Azertica does, what we need from ANKA, and what comes out of each phase.
{{ ph.title }}
Deliverables and Timeline
What ANKA receives, and on what rhythm.
Why 4 Weeks?
The duration isn't arbitrary: it reflects the real scale of the site rather than a quick pass over the homepage. The catalog is vast: the Jewelry category alone counts more than 5,000 listings across 85 pages, out of nine main categories. That requires sampling across several categories so that content findings (mixed languages, rebrand leftovers, product-page consistency) are representative, not anecdotal. On top of that, several distinct journeys need detailed testing: buyer, seller/creator, account management, plus multi-currency delivery and payment to more than 175 countries.
The timeline still holds at 4 weeks because phases run in parallel rather than one after another: technical/SEO and UX/UI start together (weeks 1–2), then content, security and the competitive benchmark also advance side by side (weeks 2–3). This is a representative, rigorous audit, built on statistical sampling of the catalog rather than checking every listing one by one.
Audit Timeline: 4 Calendar Weeks
From Audit to Action: the Technical Pivot Point
Once the audit is delivered (Phase 7), one central question drives Plans 2 and 3: should ANKA be rebuilt on a new technical platform, or should the design and key journeys be redone on the current one? That decision can't be made before the audit; it depends directly on what Phases 1 (technical) and 4 (security) reveal: accumulated technical debt, limits of the current platform, maintenance cost, and the ability to fix the structural issues seen in section 01 at the root.
ANKA starts over on a new technical architecture, a new design system and new front/back development. Heavier in time and investment, this option fixes structural problems at the root rather than working around them, and keeps today's technical debt from limiting future evolution.
ANKA keeps its current platform, and Azertica redesigns and redevelops the priority screens and journeys on top of it. Faster and less costly, this option's limit is that it keeps some technical constraints of the current platform.
Both options lead to the same Design and Development phases; only their precise technical content and duration differ. This proposal deliberately doesn't decide between them in advance: duration and investment estimates for Design and Development are given as ranges, and are finalized at the technical framing meeting that follows the audit readout.
The 3 Plans at a Glance
A quick overview to orient the choice; each plan is then detailed separately below.
| What's included | Plan 1 Audit only |
Plan 2 + Design + Development |
Plan 3 + 6-month maintenance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full 6-axis audit, roadmap, readout (section 02) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Post-audit technical framing meeting (Option A / B, section 03) | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX/UI design, prototyping & development of the new site | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| 6 months of evolving maintenance + monthly reporting | — | — | ✓ |
| Estimated total duration | ≈ 4 weeks | ≈ 4–6 months* | ≈ 10–12 months* |
| Price (fixed fee) | $4,200 | $9,000 | $11,700 |
Fixed fees, priced in USD. * Duration finalized after the technical framing meeting (section 03); it depends on the option chosen: full rebuild or redesign on the existing platform.
Plans 1, 2 and 3 are fixed fees, priced in USD. Person-day breakdowns are indicative, to illustrate the relative scale of each plan.
Next Steps
How to get started, whichever plan you choose.