Is It Out of Scope? — Web design
Is producing an extra explainer video out of scope for a web design project?
Usually yes. A second explainer video is a full new production — script, voiceover or motion, editing — beyond the one video the project scoped, even when it covers a related topic.
The project scoped and delivered one explainer video — a homepage piece walking through what the product does, say. The client, happy with the result, asks for a second one covering a different feature or use case. It's an understandable follow-up request, but a second video is a full production cycle on its own: new script, new visuals or voiceover, a new edit.
Is it out of scope?
Usually yes. Even reusing the same visual style and brand elements, a second explainer video means writing a new script and producing new footage or motion work — a comparable amount of effort to the first video, not an extension of it.
Clause typically implicated
Clause typically implicated
Deliverables clause→ — Scopes the project to the one explainer video delivered — an additional video covering different content is a new deliverable, priced comparably to the original.
Example contract wording
Example contract wording (illustrative, not legal advice)
The scope covered the one explainer video, which we delivered. A second video on [new topic] would be a new production — I can quote it using the same visual style we've already established, which should help keep costs and turnaround reasonable compared to starting cold.
How MarginFlow flags it
MarginFlow checks whether the request is for a variation of the existing video (potentially a smaller revision) or a genuinely new video on different content — the latter is flagged outside_scope, with a suggested charge reflecting that the existing visual style should reduce, but not eliminate, the production effort.