I agree with other contributors that some of the copy would benefit from revision. It lets the site down.

I know it can be difficult persuading a client that what they have written would benefit from changes. Try presenting the argument to the client that they are writing for their prospective client, not for themselves. Then you can give them examples of feedback from your researches that appear to support the advice you are giving.

I take it that in About Us Dave and Jan have written about themselves. So why the use of the third person? The impression I get from their copy could well put me off the whole idea of making a booking because of the perception conveyed to me of the personalities of the people with whom I would be sharing a confined space.

For example, not everyone shares the same sense of humour: “Answering the call of the sea at a very young age (well he would say that wouldn't he!) has resulted in over 40 years sailing experience in many different countries.”

“… well he would say that wouldn't he! …”. Not to me, I trust. And then to combine such attempts at humour in a muddle of sentence and you have me wondering will I really be able to get on with this guy?

Might you not make the About Us out of straight CV-type stuff and, to add a sense of feeling for the personalities, quotes from previous guests about how good they found Dave and Jan as hosts; how Dave and Jan added to the whole experience by their charming, attentive and unobtrusive company; how much Dave and Jan’s love of the sea, interest in the places they visited and experience of yachting, all contributed to such an enthralling voyage of a lifetime.

I agree with what others here have said about the need for improvements in the navigation.

In page construction, perhaps you should be concerned at the ratio of code to message, do you think? There is an awful lot of code.

I consider that you are missing an opportunity by not making full use of the description tag, certainly on the Home page I examined.

There is no document type declaration and so validation may throw up some spurious errors, should you be concerned with code standards. W3C validation is identifying errors.

I hope my comments are useful and not too direct. In my view, this is a site with great potential: it is looking good, presents an appealing product and, with some of the work people here are suggesting, stands to be a very successful one.

Regards, David.

__________________
Databases and Spreadsheets | Software Training