Capital Region, Denmark
AI development for Copenhagen teams, handed over in writing
We build AI products from Vancouver, British Columbia, and we work with Copenhagen teams without a single shared working hour. No office there, no staff there. What replaces the shared day is a written handoff, decisions logged as they are made, and review that happens on your morning rather than in a call.
- base
- vancouver, bc, canada (UTC-08:00)
- market
- Copenhagen, Denmark
- your clock
- UTC+01:00 (Europe/Copenhagen)
- overlap
- none on the same date, written handoff instead
- presence
- remote only, no office in Copenhagen
No shared working day, so the loop is written
Copenhagen is 9 hours ahead of Vancouver. When we start at 09:00 it is 18:00 on the same day for you, and when we stop at 17:00 it is 02:00 on the next day. On the same calendar date there is no hour where both sides are at work.
That is not an apology. A loop that turns once every twenty-four hours, in writing, is a faster way to build software than a calendar full of half-attended calls, and it forces the decisions into a form somebody can read six months later.
- A handoff note goes out at the end of every Vancouver working day: what shipped, what broke, and what needs a decision from you.
- You read it at 02:00, or whenever your day starts, and review the pull requests it points at.
- Decisions are logged as they are made, in the repository, so neither side has to reconstruct why something was done.
- A blocking question arrives with a proposed answer attached, so the default outcome is progress rather than a stalled day.
One live call a week, and it is scheduled honestly: 08:00 in Vancouver is 17:00 in Copenhagen. That hour is outside our working day and inside yours. We take the awkward end of it, because it is our job to be reachable.
What Copenhagen buyers usually bring us
The record for Copenhagen lists two industries. Here is the part of each one that turns into an engagement, and the service line it lands under.
pharmaceuticals
Regulatory documents and study reports have strict structure and strict traceability, so parsing that structure is the bulk of the schedule.
Access rules apply inside the index at retrieval time, never as a filter bolted onto the answer after the fact.
Closest service line: Knowledge bases and retrieval
wind energy
Turbine telemetry, service records and warranty terms all describe the same asset, and the product is the one that reconciles them per turbine.
Acceptance criteria are fixed before each weekly increment, which turns "is it working" into a question with a yes or a no.
Closest service line: AI products, built end to end
Contracts, currency and where the data sits
Invoices are in euros or US dollars. GDPR makes storage location a design question rather than a footnote, so the index, the logs and the model calls get pinned to European regions where your provider offers them, and that is settled in week one.
Beyond that, the shape of an engagement does not change with distance: a scoping call, a thin end-to-end slice, then weekly increments against acceptance criteria fixed in advance. If we are not the right shop for Copenhagen work, you get told that in the first reply rather than after a proposal.
The five lines we sell
Same five lines everywhere, Copenhagen included. Most engagements are one of them, sometimes two.
- AI products, built end to end
- Knowledge bases and retrieval
- Codebase and team optimization
- Training and enablement
- Forward-deployed engineering
The languages, models and infrastructure underneath all five are listed on the Magic Ship stack page, with what each one is good for and where it is the wrong choice.
Other markets in Europe
Same treatment, different clocks, and in some cases a different answer.
Start a project
Send the problem. If it is a fit, you get scope and a timeline. If it is not, you get told that in the first reply instead of after a discovery process.