The UK Babe Channels Forum

Full Version: Sin TV - General Chat & Discussion
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427
^ Absolutely agree. In addition any supplier would do credit checks on both the company trying to buy services from them and also the key personnel so any idea they might have about coming back under another name are remote as well. On a wider note such a failure also impacts on the sector as well and makes it more difficult for anyone else to start up.
So I see Sin TV have finally realised that they are over and shut up shop. Channel 942 has now gone from my Sky guide. About time this happend. Sad to see another channel go but for Sin it was their stupid fucked up mistakes that have caused their own down fall.

This channel had the potential to become the No1 channel and beat their rivals, with top babes and great sets. However they did not pay the babes. People blamed the babes cause of their attitude of being drama queens but however it was Sin that fucked up really bad so bad that every babe left. So for that Sin Fuck Off and good riddance.
So funny Bounce

I mean, yes it's unfortunate that they couldn't last any longer, but bloody hell, how long were they on for, three months???

Maybe the producers just wanted easy sex and quick cash, and didn't intend to stay on for longer? Rolleyes
(21-07-2015 00:46 )mrmann Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe the producers just wanted easy sex

bladewave Here we go with more of this nonsense,Why scottishbloke and not you eh?
(21-07-2015 01:15 )general drago Wrote: [ -> ]
(21-07-2015 00:46 )mrmann Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe the producers just wanted easy sex

bladewave Here we go with more of this nonsense,Why scottishbloke and not you eh?

Sex is natural and happens at these studios on a regular basis. My guess is that the producers of Sin wanted to shag a number of the women there, while making some money as well. However, things didn't work out as they had hoped, and they started losing money and planning things poorly.

Yes, claiming that some of the producers likely want to shag some of the women on these channels is nonsense... bladewave

You need to stop being so naive
(20-07-2015 23:59 )REX MASTER Wrote: [ -> ]This channel had the potential to become the No1 channel and beat their rivals, with top babes and great sets.

I disagree. As I posted before, their entire business plan was fundamentally flawed and economically unsustainable from day one, so it was never ever going to succeed in it's original form, so it never had the potential to be best, it only ever had the potential to fail.

What they started out with was just a fantasy channel that soon fizzled away as the start-up capital was spent. The 'real' SinTV was the one they ended up with, the one that was trying to run within it's own economy, with one tv channel, one stream, and only a handful of girls. That was hardly the No1 channel!
I don't know why people are still claiming that this channel could have been good. Thanks to munch for his explanation above that this was not the case, although I actually said before the channel even began broadcasting that it's hard to see how it could ever succeed. As I commented at the time, they didn't have a viable business plan and before very long would inevitably find themselves under severe financial pressure. People shouldn't try and create and/or perpetuate a myth that they had any real chance of succeeding.
Of course it could have been good. Any business has the potential to be good. It is just how you go about it that matters.

The astute business-man will go from bottom up ie start small. A good example of this is Iceland (the company not the country) which started with one small shop and a couple of freezers. Sin tried to buck the trend and start from the top with all those streams, high-paid girls, expenses studio etc. The top down approach can only work with a huge working capital and it has now been shown they simply did not have that.

If they do come back in September then I expect to see a 'stripped-down' (pardon the obvious pun) version and a more credible business approach. My hopes are not well founded.
^How well would they be received though. They've already alienated a fair portion of their customer base and pissed off the babes they might have working for them.
What posters are praising as the 'potential' of Sin are basically some format ideas that the existing channels should have taken up long ago, if they weren't so tight-fisted at speculating to accumulate, and so bunkered in their mentalities. Things like more expansive interactive sets, HD streams (problematic yes but hardly unachievable these days), larger use of web-only streams, second camera angle options (both since taken up and, in some ways, improved on elsewhere), bigger social media presence. 

These ideas are not negated in any way by the fact that they were instigated on the back of an unsustainable financial model as regards personnel.

A myth would also be perpetuated by suggesting that Sin could not have been turned around even following it's overly extravegant beginnings. It was it's bosses' intransigence that was the root of Sin's downfall not its innovations.

To deny any of these things smacks of a preference for the status quo and pre-existing agenda against the channel to my mind.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427
Reference URL's