Some posts have been sent to the TZ (you know the ones).
Let's leave last nights nonsense where it belongs, out of sight, out of mind.
Cheers.
(14-10-2021 11:19 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]I want to really get into the pov prompted by Tiny above; I feel it goes to something babes/the industry are underestimating massively atm. In fact I'd like to really examine the perceptions I'm left with from a lot of the shows currently; they are causing my dwindling spend and I suspect I'm not alone in this.
"customers making it rain with credits knowing that others can not complete"
Any negativity depends on the extent of rain the babe appears content with and if we feel her cloud seeding is suspect.
To explain... Consider, something has inclined many (BS and 66) studio babes to herald the prospect of earning £5/min [this post's central focus on private segments is explained below] on a semi-regular basis as a 'win'. But to me there's a degree of complaceny and self-satisfaction in that view, plus a certain lack of perspective perhaps. Viz, if these privates really are a win then why are not 100% of babes playing things this way? Why did the babes of only a couple of years ago clearly regard it as a mistake to offer privates while on a studio shift? And why do the babes of CB (for another example) not offer them as a more regular thing?
The main answer is surely that these other babes (both old and new), doing the contary, feel/felt better off (i.e. a better financial prospect) appealing to a crowd of punters for more of the time. The aim was for widespread mainstream appeal not the targetting of a kink of one group of punters. (Neither Lanta or Evelyn would be seen dead taking privates on a shift for example.) It's hard to not draw the conclusion a babe taking regular privates like this is in fact settling because she won't, or can't, work in the more profitable ways as exampled by the very top babes.
In fact I'd suggest the main channels' growing capitulation to consistent privates is an admission of defeat of sorts - an admission that a lot of their current babes can't hold two or more punters in cam on a regular enough basis to defeat the need for a vaguely punctuated string of privates.
(The switch to incentivised pay, a drive to take more money off known regulars and an over-reliance on those user balance figures displayed on the babe's laptop, have all likely contributed to the growing focus on privates also.)
It's a symptom of the shows' decline not a victory.
So that's one negative takeaway: That the babes involved have given up trying to reach my type of punter in any major way. This is of course linked to...
Punters feeling left out or abandoned
But not in the casual way you describe it.
Let's be clear of what we're speaking here.
Callers can feel pushed out by pervers, also by tippers and by privates. Tippers and even pervers can feel pushed out by privates.
The johnny come lately here - the insistent privateers if you like - are thus top of this particular totem pole of annoyance. This is the new "rain" - the one causing the biggest, current, issue; perhaps the only truly great aggravation.
And the simplistic characterisation you give of the results Tiny - of one punter being pissed off at another - once again lacks perspective and naunce if I may. Yes there's a element of feeling jipped that one is being outbid for a babe's time/attention but it goes way deeper than that. Flow breaking privates, and indeed any cam work that takes a babe off main cam, goes against what some of us regard as special about the shows - it amounts to the reduction of them to mere individual camming experiences.
As I've explained above, it also feels like a capitulation of sorts; to a format that feels like it shouldn't have to be. It feels like a compromise to suit individual babes over formats that could/should appeal more to the masses - should be more profitable - if enough babes would either align to them or were proficent enough at them to pull them off. As such it's cart leading the horse. It's babes specifying which demand they prefer to cater to, which suits her more.
Punters 'left out' by these things perceive them as an easy score and worse one that could be offered at any other time basically. It's more subtle than being simply outbid you see. And thus more frustrating and numbingly dissatisfying for it. It feels an inefficient waste of often already skimpy studio time (it enhances nothing but stark revenue and the feelings of the single punter) and of the guys left waiting (or leaving) on the outside.
Unnecessary and unnecessarily disruptive - another big negative.
Why not interact with another channel babe
That's the other rub about this situation: We worry for how much longer we'll be able to find any desirable other streams.
Plus well "favourites" as you say. Babe appeal is not that hand-wavingly interchangable!
But mostly we fear the trend being set I think.
The mass entertainment ethic founded the shows. This is the specialness I was talking of above: The shows as mass/group entertainment; as a co-operative venture between punters and babe - to everyone's benefit. This is what we value. This is what we pay towards and this is what constant privates (or babes that crop themselves to only tiny slivers of presence on main cam for hours on end) threaten. What these babes dismiss as "free" is in fact a vital part of what we wish to pay to keep in place. In the end they'll have taken 'the show' out of the babeshows. That is the fear.
Third considerable negative.
Not everything is about the individual babes you see. The threat to much customer loyalty is by virtue of this being the latest in a line of increasing damaging challenges to the very basics of what the shows are.
But heh if your babe prefers to think I'm just jealous of some guy spending a small fortune to keep her offscreen then that's her look out. Just one more example of the simplistic myopia of this industry.
Spot on. Was waiting to call Charlie C. Some guy was in private for over 2 1/2 hours. Gave up. Tried another day, saw same guy in chat asking for private and then I left.
1--to-1's such as that, might as well be done on AdultWork, or on similar sites.
So what’s a Private, five quid a minute? That makes £750 this guy spent having a wank over the phone? Does he realise he could probably spend the entire night with a escort for that?
^^ With reference to your current signature Seduced: Sig's I always took as being for anything 'of the moment' a poster wishes to highlight more prominently than a single post ever could. To be changed as the mood takes. YMMV.
(18-10-2021 16:13 )BlastedKeith Wrote: [ -> ]So what’s a Private, five quid a minute? That makes £750 this guy spent having a wank over the phone? Does he realise he could probably spend the entire night with a escort for that?
He could well be a frightened virgin.
(18-10-2021 16:13 )BlastedKeith Wrote: [ -> ]So what’s a Private, five quid a minute? That makes £750 this guy spent having a wank over the phone? Does he realise he could probably spend the entire night with a escort for that?
If a person is doing a private or cam2cam it's 50 credits per minute without the phone call which is another 15 credits per minute. if they are using the phone the max call length is 20 minutes but there no time limit on s private it's until that person finishes the private or credits runs out. but if the customer hasn't noticed when topping up that the box is ticked after they have topped up it will automatically top up as they get close to running out of credits
Someone who phones BS told me that unlike s66 there is no time limit on calls... He has been caught out a couple of times spending more than he intended.
(19-10-2021 05:35 )Spike1876 Wrote: [ -> ]Someone who phones BS told me that unlike s66 there is no time limit on calls... He has been caught out a couple of times spending more than he intended.
Depends how you're paying. If you're using credits, I don't there's a limit.