I thought last night's show was quite good. I like Tori and she put in a good performance. Her section lasted for over an hour and a quarter.
Cate Harrington and Sarah Lou were on together with a phone each for 40 minutes. Apart from Cate licking Sarah's nipple for a couple of seconds, there was no physical contact between them.
The highlight of the show was the last 30 minutes when Amanda and Donna finally appeared together. I was beginning to wonder whether Donna would be on at all. There was fondling and nipple licking/sucking of Donna's boobs by Amanda. Amanda had her bum to camera quite often and had her pants nearly down at one stage. This was about as good as it gets on freeview.
Tiffany (of the pad, not ex BS) appeared together with them for a few seconds at the end to introduce the Early Bird show. First time I've seen her on the TV. If I'd known she was on, I would have recorded her. She has been entertaining on the TeaseMe TV webshow, whenever I've seen her in the past.
Can anyone shed any light on the rumours of a second BB channel on Freeview, if so will it be watered down like the current one is, and when and if is it due to start.
(31-10-2009 21:55 )matt38 Wrote: [ -> ]Can anyone shed any light on the rumours of a second BB channel on Freeview, if so will it be watered down like the current one is, and when and if is it due to start.
I imagine they would be keen to have another channel since Cellcast have 4.
They have plenty of girls available. They sometimes have 4 separate streams working at the same time on their web player. Just tried that a few minutes ago though, and none of them was working.
I suppose it would be watered down but a start at midnight or earlier would be nice.
(31-10-2009 21:55 )matt38 Wrote: [ -> ]Can anyone shed any light on the rumours of a second BB channel on Freeview, if so will it be watered down like the current one is, and when and if is it due to start.
3 licences have been obtained from Ofcom so it's therefore possible for there to be 3 channels of Bang Babes on freeview, always assuming that airtime can be obtained to put 3 channels on. So yes it's possible that there could be a second channel before long and also a third, but the availability of airtime is ultimately the determining factor.
(31-10-2009 13:26 )TheWatcher Wrote: [ -> ]I thought last night's show was quite good. I like Tori and she put in a good performance. Her section lasted for over an hour and a quarter.
Cate Harrington and Sarah Lou were on together with a phone each for 40 minutes. Apart from Cate licking Sarah's nipple for a couple of seconds, there was no physical contact between them.
The highlight of the show was the last 30 minutes when Amanda and Donna finally appeared together. I was beginning to wonder whether Donna would be on at all. There was fondling and nipple licking/sucking of Donna's boobs by Amanda. Amanda had her bum to camera quite often and had her pants nearly down at one stage. This was about as good as it gets on freeview.
Tiffany (of the pad, not ex BS) appeared together with them for a few seconds at the end to introduce the Early Bird show. First time I've seen her on the TV. If I'd known she was on, I would have recorded her. She has been entertaining on the TeaseMe TV webshow, whenever I've seen her in the past.
Although better than the Freeview norm (not difficult, of course), just take a look at the 'Amanda - Caps & Vids' thread to see how tame it was compared to $ky.
Frankly, if BB are planning to give more of the same mediocre content (taking the past week as a whole), then the prospect of more channels, or longer hours, is not all that enticing, IMO.
Perhaps, if they are to increase hours or add another channel or 2, they might consider giving us real BB, rather than further compromise the $ky output? Wishful thinking, I fear.
The other potential problem is whether it will result in poorer picture quality, as (relatively) good PQ is one of the few things BBF has going for it, at the moment.
I thought last nights show was pretty good.
It was Adele and Amanda plus 12 minutes of girl-girl stuff from Charlie Monaco and Sarah Lou.
I had watched Amanda for over an hour, earlier in the night on the webshow, where I saw a few deliberate, but very brief, pussy/anus flashes. There was obviously nothing like this on the freeview show but her performance was still enjoyable.
The mic was working ok last night but there was no music while Charlie and Sarah were on. Instead we could very faintly hear a lot of background chat, including the girls talking on the phone. With the use of CSI audio equipment, this would have been good.
(31-10-2009 11:46 )Censorship :-( Wrote: [ -> ] (31-10-2009 10:04 )Winston Wolfe Wrote: [ -> ]To be honest I don't see why there is even an issue here... Sky originally provided the platform for adult shows in the UK. Sky costs money, Freeview is free. If you pay for Sky, you should expect better content. If anything Sky viewers are gonna be more pissed off by the emergence of Freeview crampin the style of the shows.
I was under the impression that the babe channels were FTA on satellite? If so, you don’t have to ‘pay for $ky’, as you put it, unless you are talking about the one-off payment for equipment & installation; remember, despite its name, Freeview is not free in those terms either, you still have to buy a box, or an IDTV, and potentially, a new antenna, which many people would have also pay to have installed, though it is easier to self install a TV antenna than a satellite dish, even though the latter is still quite feasible. Also, it is not always merely a case of money; some people cannot have a dish, so they have no option but Freeview, so why should they suffer additional censorship?
As for $ky viewers being more pissed off, yes, they should be annoyed at content being compromised by also going out on Freeview, but just think of the vast amount of content they get that doesn’t go out on Freeview; I know which I would rather be pissed off about!
Yeah most of these channels are free-to-air, but they only used to be available on Sky (and most still are), which requires a subscription (usually 12 months minimum). Even if most channel operators don't profit directly from Sky subscriptions, the Sky platform still provided most of their customers. Elite is a more recent example... The only place you can watch it on TV at the moment is Sky.
These days you have Freeview, which doesn't require a basic subscription. Cellcast have now moved all their channels over to Freeview, albeit for only half the time of their night shows. With the new direction Cellcast have taken recently, it won't really affect their content that much, but it will with Bang Babes. Has Jet Black been on Freeview yet? Can't imagine her style working on Freeview if Bang Babes want more airtime in the future.
Ideally, the same content would be provided for all platforms, but at the moment OFCOM won't allow it. Sky have a hand in it too... It's a no brainer that if they could have all the adult channels (free-to-air or not) exclusive to Sky then they would (more money for Sky with all the boxes sold & subscriptions).
(02-11-2009 03:15 )Winston Wolfe Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah most of these channels are free-to-air, but they only used to be available on Sky (and most still are), which requires a subscription (usually 12 months minimum). Even if most channel operators don't profit directly from Sky subscriptions, the Sky platform still provided most of their customers. Elite is a more recent example... The only place you can watch it on TV at the moment is Sky.
Completely, totally and utterly wrong.
I don't have a sky sub and currently am able to view...*quick count*...23 babe channels, including both 'Elite' and 'Elite TV' (as they're listed on the Astra Satellite channel listing thingamabob).
I get them on my computer, through a Hauppauge(sp?) DVB-S/S2/T TV Card, on my TV through a none sky decoder with multi-card reader and all without a single Sky decoder box in sight.
Anyone else can do it with a bog-standard FTA satellite decoder that you can pick up for peanuts on e-bay.
...and if you can put up a shelf and read google maps you can install a satellite dish. (which you can pick up on e-bay for peanuts...along with the cable)
...and if you can't put up a shelf, but you can get the best picture possible out of your old portable TV set by waggling an indoor ariel around then you have all the skills required to position a portable dish and get your babes that way
(02-11-2009 04:39 )TheDarkKnight Wrote: [ -> ] (02-11-2009 03:15 )Winston Wolfe Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah most of these channels are free-to-air, but they only used to be available on Sky (and most still are), which requires a subscription (usually 12 months minimum). Even if most channel operators don't profit directly from Sky subscriptions, the Sky platform still provided most of their customers. Elite is a more recent example... The only place you can watch it on TV at the moment is Sky.
Completely, totally and utterly wrong.
I don't have a sky sub and currently am able to view...*quick count*...23 babe channels, including both 'Elite' and 'Elite TV' (as they're listed on the Astra Satellite channel listing thingamabob).
I get them on my computer, through a Hauppauge(sp?) DVB-S/S2/T TV Card, on my TV through a none sky decoder with multi-card reader and all without a single Sky decoder box in sight.
Anyone else can do it with a bog-standard FTA satellite decoder that you can pick up for peanuts on e-bay.
...and if you can put up a shelf and read google maps you can install a satellite dish. (which you can pick up on e-bay for peanuts...along with the cable)
...and if you can't put up a shelf, but you can get the best picture possible out of your old portable TV set by waggling an indoor ariel around then you have all the skills required to position a portable dish and get your babes that way
You're in the minority with that one! Do you seriously believe the "majority of potential viewers/customers" are gonna bother with all that?
PS - You're being far too "pedantic" over a few choice words. You've conveniently missed the main points of my post, one of which I've highlighted in bold. This is not my opinion, it's fact. Hope this helps...
PPS - If you or anyone else has got the setup you mentioned, then good luck to you, no big deal...
(02-11-2009 10:00 )Winston Wolfe Wrote: [ -> ]You're in the minority with that one! Do you seriously believe the "majority of viewers/customers" are gonna bother with all that?
I don't really care, that wasn't the point i was trying to make.
The point I was trying to make was that you couldn't have been more wrong if you had said black was white.
Any potential viewer wouldn't need to deal with 'all that' because, as you may observe if you go back and read 'all that' again, 'all that' contains several alternative methods of gettting FTA satellite transmissions into your house.
The entire point of 'all that' was to show that installing a satellite system is a teeny-weeny bit more complicated than installing a DVB-T freeview system. Instead of ariel, cable, reciever, you have dish, cable, reciever. Pretty much the same thing.
Who would bother with that?
...anyone who wanted 23 babe channels but didn't want to pay Sky a years subscription.