The reason to be explicit about this is that percentage of revenue pricing exists in this industry and it produces a specific incentive worth understanding. A provider whose fee rises with your revenue benefits from your growth in a way that sounds aligned and means the same work costs more over time without becoming more work. That model suits some arrangements and it is not how this operates.

What does change the price is scope. A business with four services needs more pages than one with two. A business with staff needs permissions and access arrangements that a solo operator does not. A business selling online has requirements a brochure site does not have. Those are genuine differences in what the work involves, and they are quoted as such at the point the work is defined.

Growth frequently makes later work cheaper rather than more expensive, which is the part people do not expect. A business that already has clean accounts, a working site, tracking configured, and documented processes is considerably faster to work with than one starting from nothing. The foundations built in year one are what make year two engagements smaller.

Expect the quote to be based on what is actually there rather than on a rate card, since the same nominal task varies enormously by starting position. Rebuilding a site with clear positioning and existing content is a different project from one requiring the positioning to be established first, and pricing them identically would be inaccurate in both directions.

Ask what would change the number before agreeing to anything, which is a reasonable question and the answer tells you how the pricing works. A provider who can name the specific factors is pricing the work. One who cannot is pricing you, and those produce different invoices for the same deliverable.

Be careful with arrangements where the fee is a share of what the work produces, which sounds attractive and creates a measurement problem. Attributing revenue to a specific piece of digital work is genuinely difficult, and an arrangement whose cost depends on that attribution turns every reporting conversation into a negotiation.

Understand what happens if the engagement expands mid project, since that is where surprise costs originate. Anything outside what was agreed should be quoted and accepted before it starts rather than absorbed and invoiced at the end, and that is a process question rather than a pricing one.

Then keep the quote as a document rather than a conversation. A written scope with a number attached is what both parties refer to later, and it is what prevents the situation where each remembers a different figure.

Ask what happens if the business shrinks as well, which is the question nobody puts and which tests whether the pricing is genuinely tied to work. An arrangement that rises with revenue and does not fall with it is a fee structure rather than a pricing model.

Keep the original quote alongside the invoice when work completes, since comparing them is the simplest check that the arrangement operated as described. A pattern of invoices matching quotes is worth more than any assurance about how pricing works.

Expect a quote to expire, since a figure produced against your situation six months ago may not describe the work now. That is not a tactic and it is a reason to move on something within a reasonable period rather than holding a number indefinitely.