The quality of a website is not always a reflection of a companies product quality or corporate viability. I can point you to several really great websites with countless videos and very professional done that turn out absolute trash for a product and have horrible reviews on the forums, but they still continue to sell stuff based on the "glitter". What it (having a dated website) does show is that they either don't have a talented web guy or do not choose to invest in someone to do that. The fact they have been in business for years and there are not a batch of negative reviews should be something to check on the positive side of the ledger. This landscape is littered with the bones of failed companies but most had decent websites because they could be in a garage or a 10,000 sq ft building and post anything they want . For the first 5 years in business our website was pretty lame because it was developed by me and I worked on it when I had time (almost never). Now we have a dedicated graphics dept and a web master . It's about priorities and product development and support should trump glitz if its either/or. In a list of criteria of who you should consider writing a check to for lots of money, the quality of the website has to fall in the "marketing" part which should not be at the top of the list
TOMcaudle
www.candcnc.com