I have to admin (building a number of websites every year) that I react as Mike – a company not taking their web presence seriously would have a hard time convincing me of their intentions and their commitment to quality and the customers.

But Point's website works fine for me. There are of course minor problems that I note: it does not seem to be responsive (is Point unaware of pads and smartphones with internet access or is there a different site that loads in small screens?), and the irritating habit of decorating the site with unexplained icons with technical mambo-jumbo (what is "symmetrical skeg system" – I would have thought most skeg very symmetrical). It took a Google search to find a page offering some kind of explanation. But more real info and less marketing fluff wouldn't hurt...

More serious, if not visible for the visitor, is that there are loads of html errors in the code, that probably are the reason that Mike is not happy with the performance. Such errors indicate that the site works in some browsers but not in others.

Furthermore to load time is on the slow side. I get 3,85 seconds to load the start page – due to a bloated CSS and 205! http requests (which is the number of files that the browser must call upon to render the page)! That is not paying attention to customer experience. Some tweaking of the underlying structure would have made a significant difference (my own site, the start page, loads in 0,645 s and with 26 http requests). But remember this is just the first time on a site – when returning the browser does not load all of those resources but fetch them in the browsers cache, which is much faster.

But still, I think Point's is a quite OK website, better than many in the business. Here are some competitor's numbers (http requests-load time): Tahe 62-3,95 s, Epic 33 - 3,33 s, Tiderace 54 - 5,48 s, Current Designs 59 - 3,90 s, Guillemot 113 - 0,840 s. Note that these sites are of different complexity (some are image-intensive or have a webshop built-in) and that the load time depends on external factors like server response, quality of connection etc – it may vary over time, and some of the figures may be a happy or unhappy coincidence. A site should be monitored continuosly, which can be done with fx Pingdom service.