Maybe not much will change on the channel. Perhaps in view of some of the girls that have featured recently they just realised that 'starlets' was an inappropriate name. If all they have done is correct an ill-chosen name then we shouldn't read too much into the name change.
On the other hand with Cali appearing last night I could be completely wrong and the channel will now simply be another Babestation channel.
lets face it, under the name "starlets" there was nothing new or innovating about the channel, so if they change it to something else, who cares? We're not losing anything!
(06-09-2014 18:40 )tony confederate Wrote: [ -> ]No chance I'm afraid.
Something like 90% of views in this forum come from guests - who most likely have no interest in heated/amusing debates.
Whilst that may be true, you have to remember that many of the guests will be regular, they probably view the forum on a daily basis and therefore are no different to your or I except they haven't signed up.
Some new members even state this within their hello posts, they say they have been keeping up with proceedings for some time, and only now deciding to sign up.
(06-09-2014 18:49 )Count Spankula Wrote: [ -> ]You can't - and I never said you could.
I said the forum is a good indicator of how much interest there is in a channel.
ChatGirl TVX is a classic example - it was virtually ignored in this forum most of the time.
You originally stated that because of the lack of views in the Starlets thread compared to S66USA thread, you wasn't surprised it didn't last as long.
To me that suggests your measuring the success of a channel based on the viewing tally of each said thread on this forum.
My only point was that not all attention (views) are there for the right reasons, as it would need to be.
Also isn't it interesting how you said this morning this thread only had 15000 views (I'll take your word I didn't look) but now since the debates
it's working up to 17000? In one day? Quite substantial, and is the mood positive? No, but every man and his dog are reading clicking up those views.
(06-09-2014 20:56 )benrichards7 Wrote: [ -> ]lets face it, under the name "starlets" there was nothing new or innovating about the channel, so if they change it to something else, who cares? We're not losing anything!
Because bs for me were saying it was something new or innovating, a channel dedicated to babes that are new or inexperienced along with giving some of their bs babes "a chance to shine" that they weren't getting on the other bs channels. In the end it didn't deliver for me what bs said bs starlets would do. Possibly the callers weren't calling starlets because of the name starlets, thinking they would see new or up and coming babes but were seeing the likes of mica martinez, brookie little, maddie rose and Cali Garcia on it who have been on the babeshows for years, so bs have decided to change the name to bs2
Interesting to see if it will still just be the starlets babes on bs2 or whether other bs babes will be on it
(06-09-2014 21:31 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]seeing the likes of mica martinez, brookie little, maddie rose and Cali Garcia
I know, that must have been so disappointing for them
(06-09-2014 21:31 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting to see if it will still just be the starlets babes on bs2 or whether other bs babes will be on it
Rammy, some of the other BS babes not just the starlets appeared on BS2/Starlets last night, so i should think they will do the same tonight .. .
(06-09-2014 21:31 )Rammyrascal Wrote: [ -> ] (06-09-2014 20:56 )benrichards7 Wrote: [ -> ]lets face it, under the name "starlets" there was nothing new or innovating about the channel, so if they change it to something else, who cares? We're not losing anything!
Because bs for me were saying it was something new or innovating, a channel dedicated to babes that are new or inexperienced along with giving some of their bs babes "a chance to shine" that they weren't getting on the other bs channels. In the end it didn't deliver for me what bs said bs starlets would do. Possibly the callers weren't calling it because of the name starlets, thinking they would see new or up and coming babes but were seeing the likes of mica martinez, brookie little, maddie rose and Cali Garcia on it who have been on the babeshows for years, so bs have decided to change the name to bs2
Interesting to see if it will still just be the starlets babes on bs2 or whether other bs babes will be on it
funny how you didn't mention ria martinez, ruby ryder, amy green, kimberley jenner, sophie parker and sienna day, albeit the latter two have done unleashed, if this was S66 starlets you would have mentioned their names of course
btw not everyone watches the channels religiously so for all they know girls like sophie, ria and sienna are starlets, last night though was when the name of this channel become truly pointless as i saw solo sections of lori, sophie and preeti on it
To give bs the benefit of the doubt perhaps they planned to introduce new girls but they couldn't find any to the standard they wanted so they had to use established girls.
(06-09-2014 21:15 )Bandwagon Wrote: [ -> ]Also isn't it interesting how you said this morning this thread only had 15000 views (I'll take your word I didn't look) but now since the debates it's working up to 17000?
The channel went from Starlets to BS2 last night - do you not think that change would have created interest in what was happening?
(06-09-2014 21:58 )Count Spankula Wrote: [ -> ]The channel went from Starlets to BS2 last night - do you not think that change would have created interest in what was happening?
Yes I'm sure it has to some extent, but let's take the 'S66 can it get any worse thread' for example.
So why were people viewing that thread so often? (150000 views in only 3 months)
That thread was full of everything and anything, mainly lots of S66 bashing and countless debates, so by your logic should we include that as S66
interest then?
A staggering monument of their success I suppose.