[the 'stache]

You hit the nail on the head, Robert. I've developed websites for people before. Often, clients wanted to completely change their site when it was absolutely unnecessary. I understand wanting to update a site's appearance, and try out some of the new bells and whistles popping up on the web. Depending on your product, and your target audience, you may want to keep at the cutting edge, and updated HTML etc can offer that. Dynamic content can really impress if it's presented properly. But sometimes that's easily accomplished with just changing the style sheet (updating the color scheme, different typography, some changed imagery, etc). But I can't tell you how many times I've talked to people who wanted to redo the whole thing from the ground floor up. Bad idea. If you've had your site a while, that means people are used to the structure that comes with it. Change everything dramatically, and you make the viewing experience less enjoyable for the client, not more. I haven't looked at PSA's site since the change, but I already have a vague idea what to expect.

There are good principles of design that apply to art, and to a website, too. I have found that efficient management of space is chief among them in web design. There needs to be white space, or the eye will get tired out, and the customer will feel overwhelmed. Good structure, where everything make for a smooth experience, and keep a potential client coming back to at least look at what you have to offer.