Home Top Developers Blog Write For Us Write a Review Sign In Create Account Request a Quote

Settore Q

Write a Review Claim this Company
4.8/5 (7 reviews)
+390694359537 info@settoreq.it Visit Website

About Settore Q

Sector Q is a reality in which seniorities coexist in the field of marketing, creativity, and programming. Each of them comes from adventurous and formative experiences: survivors of communication multinationals, visionary creators, copy enthusiasts, marketing trend-setters and code experts ready for anything. They become your most friendly partner and use the power of technology to make cutting-edge solutions that are effective for you.

Last updated May 13, 2026

Services

Mobile App Development Web Development UI-UX Design Web Design Social Media Marketing Content Marketing Advertising, Media

Industries Served

Education Nonprofit & NGO Fashion & Apparel Government & Public Sector Information Technology

Settore Q Reviews

Write a Review

User research that uncovered friction we had stopped noticing because it was always there

Jia Hui Tan / VP of Engineering - RedDot Technologies Pte Ltd
Verified
Feb 24, 2026

Project summary: As a technology business ourselves we apply the same scrutiny to our vendor selection that our clients apply to us. We needed a delivery partner who could meet a standard we would be comfortable being measured against.

The project brief was ambitious and we had received proposals ranging from two to five times our eventual budget from other vendors. This team came back with a proposal that was commercially realistic and technically credible — and then delivered against it. That alignment between proposal and outcome is not something I take for granted. I have been on the other side of it enough times to know it requires both honesty in the sales process and discipline in delivery. We experienced both.

PROS

Commercially transparent throughout — no hidden assumptions, no bill shock at the end, change requests that were fair and clearly explained rather than used as a margin-recovery mechanism

CONS

The engagement was priced at the quality level rather than the budget level. We evaluated the alternatives and concluded that the delta was a reasonable premium for the reduction in delivery risk

4.5
Overall
5.0
Quality
4.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
5.0
Communication
Project TypeUI/UX Design
IndustryInformation Technology
Project Cost$50,000 to $149,999
DurationMar 2025 – Dec 2025

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
RedDot Technologies Pte Ltd operates in the Information Technology sector with headquarters in Singapore. In my role as VP of Engineering I am accountable for the full technology agenda — infrastructure, product, and vendor relationships. We are a commercially driven organisation and every technology decision is evaluated against a clear business case before it is approved.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
A competitive threat had accelerated our roadmap. We had planned a significant UI/UX Design investment for the following year. External pressure moved that timeline forward by six months and required us to find an external partner rather than attempting to build internally in the time available.
What services did the company provide for your project?
End-to-end UI/UX Design delivery with particular depth in the integration and data migration components, which were the highest-risk elements of the programme. They supplemented this with a dedicated QA resource throughout development and a documented runbook for our operations team at handover.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We ran a structured shortlisting process across five vendors. The technical evaluation eliminated two immediately. Of the remaining three, this team's proposal was differentiated by the specificity of their UI/UX Design approach and the evidence base they provided — reference projects in Information Technology contexts, not generic case studies. The reference calls confirmed a track record that the proposal had described accurately.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly and precisely. The requirements document they produced was detailed enough that our QA team used it directly to write acceptance criteria. Every user story had a defined business objective attached. Nothing was left to interpretation. That discipline in the requirements phase paid dividends throughout development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Outstanding. The discipline around asynchronous communication was particularly effective given the time zones involved between Singapore and the delivery team. Written updates were specific and consistent, response times were same-day for anything that required a decision, and nothing fell through the cracks across a six-month engagement.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
On time and within the approved budget. The estimation accuracy was notable — they had broken the work down in sufficient detail during discovery that their forecast proved reliable throughout, rather than being a number that shifted with every change in scope. We received one change request and it was for scope we had introduced ourselves.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live four months ago. User adoption exceeded the target we had set by 23 percent in the first month. Support ticket volume has dropped measurably. The features we had deferred because the previous architecture made them prohibitively expensive to build are now in development. The platform they built has opened our roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The continuity of the team. The engineers who participated in the discovery sessions were the engineers who built the system. That consistency of institutional knowledge across a six-month project has a value that is difficult to quantify but easy to notice when it is absent. Every conversation built on the previous ones.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes. I would add the context that this is not the cheapest option in the market and they are selective about the engagements they take on. If your primary criterion is price, there are alternatives. If you want a technology partner who can be trusted with a complex UI/UX Design programme in the Information Technology space and will deliver against a serious brief, this is the team.

Game launched with a four-point-seven store rating and no critical bugs in the first two weeks

Nisha Pillai / Director of Engineering - GrowthBridge Ventures
Verified
Jan 07, 2026

Project summary: Rapid growth had created a skills gap on the platform engineering side of our business. We needed an experienced partner to close that gap while our internal team scaled, without compromising quality or timeline.

The integration layer was the part of the project I was most concerned about going in. Our system landscape is complex, several of the upstream APIs we relied on were poorly documented, and two third-party vendors had a history of unpredictable response times on integration questions. This team managed all of that. They documented what the upstream vendors could not, built resilience into the integration architecture where the upstream behaviour was unreliable, and delivered a solution that works as specified in production. I could not have asked for more.

PROS

Production system that has performed as specified since go-live without remediation work, documentation thorough enough to support internal maintenance, knowledge transfer that left our team genuinely capable

CONS

We underestimated the input required from our subject matter experts during the requirements phase. The team flagged this early but our resource planning did not fully reflect it — our responsibility, not theirs

4.5
Overall
4.5
Quality
4.5
Schedule
4.5
Cost
4.0
Communication
Project TypeGame Development
IndustryInformation Technology
Project Cost$10,000 to $49,999
DurationMar 2025 – Nov 2025

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
I lead technology at GrowthBridge Ventures, a growth-stage Information Technology business based in Pune, India. As Director of Engineering my remit spans product engineering, platform operations, and strategic vendor partnerships. We had reached an inflection point where our internal capacity was not sufficient to execute our roadmap at the pace our market required.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
We had a defined product vision for our next phase of growth in the Information Technology market but lacked the engineering depth internally to execute it. The Game Development requirements in particular required specialist experience that we could not realistically recruit for on the timeline our business plan required.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Primarily Game Development, with adjacent work in solution architecture and quality assurance. They were responsible for the full build from requirements through to go-live, including integration with four existing systems in our technology landscape. The breadth they covered without requiring additional vendors was commercially and logistically valuable.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
We ran a structured shortlisting process across five vendors. The technical evaluation eliminated two immediately. Of the remaining three, this team's proposal was differentiated by the specificity of their Game Development approach and the evidence base they provided — reference projects in Information Technology contexts, not generic case studies. The reference calls confirmed a track record that the proposal had described accurately.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Better than we managed ourselves going in. The workshops they facilitated surfaced assumptions we had not examined and exposed three requirements that were in direct conflict with each other. Resolving those before development began saved us what would certainly have been significant rework later in the project.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Communication was proactive, timely, and appropriately calibrated. Technical updates for the engineering audience, executive summaries for the steering group, risk flags with proposed mitigations rather than just problem statements. The fortnightly sprint reviews gave our stakeholders visibility without requiring them to attend every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
The project landed on time. The budget was managed within the agreed ceiling, which included one client-driven scope addition that was quoted fairly and handled without affecting the original delivery stream. The discipline around budget transparency throughout meant there was no surprise at invoice stage.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live four months ago. User adoption exceeded the target we had set by 23 percent in the first month. Support ticket volume has dropped measurably. The features we had deferred because the previous architecture made them prohibitively expensive to build are now in development. The platform they built has opened our roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The post-launch behaviour. Some vendors consider go-live to be the end of their professional obligation. This team treated it as the transition to a different kind of engagement. The hypercare period was substantive, the documentation was thorough and genuinely useful, and they checked in proactively at the thirty-day and ninety-day marks to review production metrics with us.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes. I would add the context that this is not the cheapest option in the market and they are selective about the engagements they take on. If your primary criterion is price, there are alternatives. If you want a technology partner who can be trusted with a complex Game Development programme in the Information Technology space and will deliver against a serious brief, this is the team.

Company Info

Founded 2012
Employees 2 - 9
Hourly Rate $25 - $49
Client Rating 4.8/5 (7 reviews)

Rating Breakdown

Quality
4.8
Schedule
4.6
Cost
4.8
Communication
4.7

FAQs

Will Settore Q sign an NDA before we even discuss the project in detail?
Most professional shops, including Settore Q, expect to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement before getting into specifics — it's a fairly standard ask and a reasonable one to make before sharing anything sensitive. For context, it has served clients in Italy, and its average project cost is reported at $2500000+.
How do I actually get a real proposal out of Settore Q instead of a generic reply?
The most reliable route is giving Settore Q a clear, specific brief up front — through their website form, a direct email, or a call — since a vague ask tends to get a vague answer back, while a concrete one usually gets a proper estimate. For context, its listed capabilities span Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design, and it reports a team size of 2 - 9 professionals.
Does Settore Q actually build with AI, or just talk about it?
Plenty of modern software teams, Settore Q included, now build real AI and machine learning features — chatbots, predictive models, computer vision, and automation that goes beyond simple rule-based scripts. For context, it has served clients in Italy, and its average project cost is reported at $2500000+.
What does Settore Q's actual delivery process look like week to week?
Settore Q generally runs something close to a standard structured process — requirements gathering, UI/UX design, development in agile sprints, QA testing along the way, deployment, and support once it's live. For context, its listed capabilities span Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
What makes Settore Q worth considering over other options?
What tends to set Settore Q apart usually comes down to some mix of technical depth, relevant industry experience, how clients describe working with them, their development approach, communication habits, and whether they can actually deliver something that scales. Founded in 2012, the company has built a track record of delivering projects across various industries.
What should I expect to pay to work with Settore Q?
What Settore Q charges comes down to a handful of variables — how complex the project is, the number of development hours involved, the tech stack required, team size, and which engagement model you pick. Based on available data, Settore Q's typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49, with an average project cost of $2500000+.
Can Settore Q take on an old, outdated system rather than starting from scratch?
Modernizing legacy software is usually within scope for a firm like Settore Q — re-platforming, refactoring old code, and moving things onto current frameworks or cloud infrastructure without necessarily rebuilding everything from zero. For context, it has served clients in Italy, and its average project cost is reported at $2500000+.
Would Settore Q be a good fit for an early-stage startup?
Generally, yes — companies like Settore Q tend to work well with startups because of what they typically offer: MVP builds, product strategy input, architecture that can scale later, and dedicated teams that keep costs manageable while still moving fast. For context, its listed capabilities span Advertising, Media, Content Marketing, Mobile App Development, Social Media Marketing and UI-UX Design, and its typical hourly rate is around $25 - $49.
Is Settore Q more of an offshore setup or a local team?
That depends on where Settore Q is based and who they primarily serve — some firms like this operate fully offshore, some are local-first, and plenty run a hybrid model that mixes both. For context, it has served clients in Italy, and it has been operating since 2012.

Similar Companies

Nearby Companies