A template site quoted at a fraction of a custom build looks like an obvious saving. The saving is real on day one. The question is what happens on day two hundred.
Where the cost reappears
Three costs tend to surface. The first is the plugin tax: every feature the template does not have becomes a third-party dependency, each with its own subscription, update cycle and failure mode. The second is the performance cost, because a page assembled from a dozen plugins loads like a page assembled from a dozen plugins. The third, and the expensive one, is that you do not own the thing you paid for.
When a template is the right call
None of this makes templates wrong. For a brochure site that will not change much, a template is a sensible, honest choice, and we will tell you so.
It becomes wrong when the site is load-bearing — when it takes payments, holds customer data, or is the primary way people reach the business. At that point the constraint stops being cosmetic and starts being structural, and structural constraints are the ones you cannot design around later.
The question worth asking
The useful test is not 'what does this cost'. It is 'what does it cost to change this in a year'. Ask that early and the answer usually picks the approach for you.