I'd really give a lot of thought to getting rid of Flash. Seriously. It's not just because of a bunch of uptight people like myself who browse with FlashBlock (it eliminates an awful lot of the most annoying and distracting badness of a lot of websites and ads), but it's not supported on Apple iOS devices (iPhone, iPad). That doesn't necessarily mean getting rid of the effects altogether, but it does mean moving to newer tech. (Adobe is beginning to roll out HTML5/CSS/JS authoring tools that should give you most of the Flash-y goodness—and it
is goodness if it's used appropriately and done well—without running into device- and OS-support dead ends.)
That said, there's not enough on your landing page. You know what's "inside", and you even know that "inside" is the clickable link that will get you there. It's not obvious to the user in any way, though, and there's not enough information on the landing page to entice the user into looking for the mystery navigation element—assuming they are going to wait through the drawing animation for the element to appear. For most users (potential clients), that's a paddling (back button).
Your "intro.html" is almost what your landing page
should be. (You could conceivably add a show-off animation to that page, rename it "index.html" and call it a day.) It has a concise description (some of it by implication) of what your business is all about, and there are clear links to the site's innards. I would make all of the bold text in the bullet points on the left links to the appropriate section of the site, though—they look like they should be calls to action, and I was immediately drawn to click on them.
It seems you have a little bit left to learn about the idioms of web communication. If it makes sense for something to be a link, and is different enough from the surrounding text to attract the eye, then it
must be a link. Don't think of usability testing as optional (and don't fall into the trap of doing the testing yourself—you know too much about your design to be able to test it). That doesn't have to mean hiring consultants or extra testing staff (difficult for a very small shop or a one-man operation to sustain);
hallway testing will do. You will quickly learn to identify the major user expectations and behaviours, see what frustrates people, and what makes them click on your money-makers (in this case, your in-depth sales pitch).
As for Dreamweaver... yes, it is a bit of a problem. It's a designer's tool for a coder's world. And it doesn't help that it's an acquiredd third-party product that doesn't integrate well with the rest of the suite (from a UI perspective—and, honestly, the former Macromedia products have been historically bad in the same way). Really, the faster you can learn to do what Dreamweaver does by yourself, the better off you'll be, even if that just means learning to spend most of your time in code view mode rather than in design mode. It can be hard for a Photoshop, Illustrator or InDesign user to learn to give up pixel-perfect control, but it will make a world of difference to your web design and coding. Two great resources to look at are
Smashing Magazine and
A List Apart.
On the whole, though, I like your design. It shows a good use of graphics, typography, colour, whitespace and (perhaps most importantly) restraint. Once your design is as usable as it is attractive, I think you'll find that the marketing will become a lot easier. Conversions are key. Even if you can persuade a billion internet users to come to your site by putting ads all over the place and making sure you're at the top of every search result, you won't get conversions (in your case, consultation requests and RFPs) if you can't keep them clicking on things that will convince them more than ever that your services are exactly what they need. You're on the right track; just pay a bit more attention to usability and testing, and you'll be okay.
