Next.js in San Francisco
Next.js development for San Francisco product teams
A Next.js development company for San Francisco product teams. No working-day overlap at all, buyers with their own senior engineers, and decisions written to be read rather than explained.
- Working day overlap
- Effectively none. San Francisco is ten hours behind Ankara, so our day has ended before yours begins
- Who buys here
- Funded product companies with their own senior engineers, usually with a Next.js application already in production
- What that changes
- Nothing can be resolved in a conversation, so every decision has to be written well enough to be argued with while we are asleep
- Local specifics
- The work is almost always inside an existing codebase under load rather than a new build, which changes the first two weeks completely
San Francisco is the hardest time zone we work across and the easiest market to be useful in, for the same reason.
Ten hours of difference means there is no overlap worth planning around. Our working day has finished before a San Francisco office opens. Nothing can be settled in a conversation, which removes the entire mode of working that most distributed teams rely on - and forces the one that actually produces better engineering.
Written decisions, because there is no other option
In a market with five hours of overlap, a bad proposal can be rescued by a call. Here it cannot, so proposals have to be written well enough to be read, understood and disagreed with by somebody who has no access to the author.
In practice that means a short document or a pull request description that states the problem, the options considered, the one chosen and what it costs. Your engineers read it during their day and respond. We act on the response during ours. One round trip per day.
That sounds slower than a conversation and frequently is not, because nothing waits for a shared calendar slot, and because the written version survives. Three months later the reasoning is still there, which is more than can be said for a decision made verbally on a Tuesday.
One hard problem, defined narrowly
San Francisco buyers almost always have their own senior engineers. That shapes what kind of engagement is worth anybody's money.
Broad augmentation does not work across this gap. With a capable in-house team and no overlap, wide involvement generates coordination overhead instead of throughput - questions queue overnight, context is re-established every morning, and everybody is slightly frustrated.
What does work is a single named problem with a boundary around it. A rendering strategy that stopped matching the application two product pivots ago. A performance regression that has survived three quarters of good intentions. A migration that needs a month nobody has. Those are self-contained, they can be reasoned about in writing, and they have a definition of done that does not require a meeting to confirm.
Arriving in a San Francisco codebase that is already live
The work here is rarely a new build. It is almost always an application in production, carrying load, with a team that knows where the problems are and no capacity to deal with them.
So the first two weeks are reading rather than writing, and that is deliberate. Which routes render which way, and whether that was decided or inherited. Where the use client boundary actually sits as opposed to where somebody intended it. What the bundle contains, and which dependency is responsible for the largest part of it. What the caching actually does, as distinct from what the configuration suggests.
The output is a written map and a ranked list of findings with costs attached. That has value whether or not the engagement continues, and it is what arriving in an existing codebase is actually about. An audit is often the right shape for a first engagement across this distance, because it is entirely asynchronous by nature.
Commercially
Scope fixed in writing before work starts, priced per project. The country-level ground - state privacy laws, ADA accessibility exposure, invoicing in dollars - is on the United States market page.
Invoiced by Codefacture Yazılım A.Ş. in Türkiye, in US dollars by bank transfer. No Turkish VAT appears, under the export-of-services exemption, and there is no US entity on our side.
