(15-01-2016 16:38 )richpk Wrote: [ -> ]scaremongering that the channels will follow suit when they have shown no sign of it.............
not all channels have to be the same. is that so hard to understand? is it really that terrible for them to differentiate themselves from the others?
why do you need more from a channel that has defined itself to be different, when your wants are supplied by other channels with no signs of that changing?
the changes you propose are the reason i DON'T watch the other channels much. i find the onscreen content of BS boring and for the fact they always show a girl on screen and take 5 minutes to log her in so guys call and waste money is a big turn off. If i want nudity and something different i will watch the hardcore streams on rampant.
You continue to misrepresent what I, and others to some extent, have said. Did I mention nudity? Did I uphold BS as some babe channel altar to be worshipped at. I used it as an example only (comparing it to Harvester is hardly giving it five stars is it?). You are the one that keeps mentioning BS.
No-one likes that log-in business why bring it up except as a straw man argument?
Not one of the things I mention in my original list could be seriously said to weaken their product if introduced.
What is really, truly, distinctive about Xpanded? It is surely only the LACK of these things. It is this lack that allows their the real crowd-pleaser of course: Its pricing structure. Do you fear that would have to change if these things were introduced?
As for scaremongering, have you not noticed the use of double babes on other channels; the reduction in the use of sets; the increasingly unmanned cameras? The cutting of costs all round began a long time ago. The ultimate result
was Xpanded! Why would the other channels stop with where they are at now when Xpanded are apparently the only ones on the up commercially amongst them? Is that scaremongering to think more of their business models may go down the Xpanded path in these circumstances? I think not.
(15-01-2016 19:27 )m100 Wrote: [ -> ]dude, lighten up i am taking the piss - it's the fact that you are defending this channel against any and all criticisms of it that is suggesting to people that you work for them. You enjoy the channel, fine. You're a paying (calling) customer, fine. so am i once in a while. but they are playing the lowest common denominator card and eventually so many people would imagine that is going to stop appealing to callers and viewers alike. They are the channel most likely to face the harshest criticism on here simply because of their attitude to this and other forums like it - that is something both you and they will have to accept - not that they care at the moment but when the wheels start falling off as they inevitably will then maybe they will wish they had moved on or had seen the promotional aspects of those things that they currently seem to see as a huge problem ie caps or videos r even alowing their girls to post on here.
oh me lighten up lolololol
i can accept criticism, but i am entitled to disagree also with that criticism and post about it in a positive light right? thought thats what forum discussions were about, both sides sharing and airing their opinions
as for the wheels falling off, how long they been going now? please
i agree with the fact they dont allow the girls to post on here or forums outside there's is stupid.
(15-01-2016 19:31 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]You continue to misrepresent what I, and others to some extent, have said. Did I mention nudity? Did I uphold BS as some babe channel alter to be worshipped at. I used it as an example only (comparing it to Harvester is hardly giving it five stars is it?). You are the one that keeps mentioning BS.
No-one likes that log-in business why bring it up except as a straw man argument?
Not one of the things I mention in my original list could be seriously said to weaken their product if introduced.
What is really, truly, distinctive about Xpanded? It is surely only the LACK of these things. It is this lack that allows their the real crowd-pleaser of course: Its pricing structure. Do you fear that would have to change if these things were introduced?
As for scaremongering, have you not noticed the use of double babes on other channels; the reduction in the use of sets; the increasingly unmanned cameras? The cutting of costs all round began a long time ago. The ultimate result was Xpanded! Why would the other channels stop with where they are at now when Xpanded are apparently the only ones on the up commercially amongst them? Is that scaremongering to think more of their business models may go down the Xpanded path in these circumstances? I think not.
the channels cut costs for a variety of reasons, dosent mean they are going to follow suit and copy Xpandeds format and to think so is scaremongering IMHO
nudity has been mentioned in this discussion, i havent misrepresented anything said but addressed everything
i mention BS as the complaints are mainly the things that BS produce, so it seems that is what you guys want. the BS format
i never mentioned anything about log in so no idea why you brought that up
what is distinctive about Xpanded is that they dont subscribe to the need of the other channels to produce the same content. not rocket science
and can you BS reps stop complaining, really not a good look for your channel
(15-01-2016 19:47 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ] (15-01-2016 19:38 )richpk Wrote: [ -> ]...i never mentioned anything about log in so no idea why you brought that up...
(15-01-2016 16:38 )richpk Wrote: [ -> ]...
the changes you propose are the reason i DON'T watch the other channels much. i find the onscreen content of BS boring and for the fact they always show a girl on screen and take 5 minutes to log her in so guys call and waste money is a big turn off. ...
oh i thought you meant the log in on the xpanded site
its a genuine complaint that they have the girls onscreen on BS and they dont log them in for up to 5 minutes, getting guys to call and wasting money. maybe you find that acceptable
how long they have been going makes absolutely no difference. long established businesses in all forms go out of business all the time - picture a high street at the time xpanded started and one today and there is your answer.
i'm certainly not going to defend babestation - i think their call tactics are vile. the fake girl callers shit should have seen their customers base fall through the floor but i think xpanded have used a similar ploy in the form of the chatters, many of whom are clearly studio staff who are 'calling' to create a queue when business is slow.
(15-01-2016 19:53 )m100 Wrote: [ -> ]how long they have been going makes absolutely no difference. long established businesses in all forms go out of business all the time - picture a high street at the time xpanded started and one today and there is your answer.
i'm certainly not going to defend babestation - i think their call tactics are vile. the fake girl callers shit should have seen their customers base fall through the floor but i think xpanded have used a similar ploy in the form of the chatters, many of whom are clearly studio staff who are 'calling' to create a queue when business is slow.
to the first point, it is relevant because the nature of business past is all we can go on unless we have a crystal ball. comparing retail to phonesex dosent equate
to the second point, if there is evidence of that then it is deplorable
(15-01-2016 19:49 )richpk Wrote: [ -> ]oh i thought you meant the log in on the xpanded site
its a genuine complaint that they have the girls onscreen on BS and they dont log them in for up to 5 minutes, getting guys to call and wasting money. maybe you find that acceptable
I thought you said you didn't misrepresent?
(15-01-2016 19:31 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]No-one likes that log-in business why bring it up except as a straw man argument?
^ok, one time and i clearly misread what was written, still a valid comnplaint