(11-02-2020 16:58 )MacDanett Wrote: [ -> ]I've never seen any of these Mr P shows on the web, but most people here semm to be discussing them very seriously. Aren't they just meant to be a bit of fun and nothing is supposed to happen for real, except for the girls being groped? Or are people expecting them to progress to full on sex shows?
Some people seem to WANT them to progress to full-on sex shows and are disappointed and argumentative when they don't.
sophies back on tonight so maybe we get another mr p show,,,,,,if he has the stamina we all know sophie hart does
(11-02-2020 12:40 )winsaw Wrote: [ -> ]I enjoyed the show with Sophie, that's how a girl should be going for it really looking like she's enjoying herself, makes it so it doesn't matter if he's not inside her it's easy to suspend your disbelief just like when you watch good wrestling,
Bs seam to be leaving how to shoot the shows better it was shot more like porn than webcam and that helped a lot and I thought it was very sexy stuff, no problems with a Mr P show like that ,
agreed and certainly helps having the experienced ric porter on board
These shows certainly seem to have become controversial and the cause of considerable dissatisfaction, and yet it seems to me that Babestation could quite easily sort it out.
My approach to the shows is the same as to any other service offered for sale. Do I trust the provider? If not, I will not proceed.
Because these are web-only shows, there is no practical legal limit on what can be broadcast, as long as the performers are consenting adults. The limits are those imposed by what the performers are prepared to do, or prepared to allow to be shown. This is where trust comes in. If I am to contribute to a tip goal or pay to use the perv cam, I want to know what is being provided. So, with Jess, for example, if she says she will be doing a blow job show, a facial or full sex, then I have information (which, because it is Jess, I trust) on which to decide whether to spend. I have no problem with another performer being willing only to let the guy touch her or to pretend to have oral sex, and, knowing this, may still be prepared to contribute. What has clearly annoyed many viewers is the idea that they are being enticed to pay for something which is not on offer. The chat boxes clearly indicate the disappointment of viewers who feel conned.
So, if Babestation want happy punters willing to spend their money, why can they not just be clear about what the performers limits are?
Both Anna and Alice in tonight.
If there's going to be a catfight over who gets Mr P, maybe they could put that on pervcam
The begging and pleading for a Mr P show reached new levels tonight, but it was to no avail.
(11-02-2020 18:45 )Wardjackson Wrote: [ -> ]The chat boxes clearly indicate the disappointment of viewers who feel conned.
So, if Babestation want happy punters willing to spend their money, why can they not just be clear about what the performers limits are?
Clearly the mood of the chat boxes is not corresponding to what Babestation are aactally earning from the shows. Maybe they are the loud minority.
(13-02-2020 07:02 )KerrAvon Wrote: [ -> ] (11-02-2020 18:45 )Wardjackson Wrote: [ -> ]The chat boxes clearly indicate the disappointment of viewers who feel conned.
So, if Babestation want happy punters willing to spend their money, why can they not just be clear about what the performers limits are?
Clearly the mood of the chat boxes is not corresponding to what Babestation are aactally earning from the shows. Maybe they are the loud minority.
The problem is that most of those shouting for a Mr P show are freeloaders who never contribute a penny towards the tip goal. This makes the targets harder and longer to achieve as there are less then 10% of viewers who actually tip.
These shows become uneconomic especially as tipsters are wary as there are so many con shows which set a poor example.
I can see the day when the web shows are for members only and the freeloaders are stuck with the tame tv shows.
(13-02-2020 09:11 )smiley boy Wrote: [ -> ] (13-02-2020 07:02 )KerrAvon Wrote: [ -> ] (11-02-2020 18:45 )Wardjackson Wrote: [ -> ]The chat boxes clearly indicate the disappointment of viewers who feel conned.
So, if Babestation want happy punters willing to spend their money, why can they not just be clear about what the performers limits are?
Clearly the mood of the chat boxes is not corresponding to what Babestation are aactally earning from the shows. Maybe they are the loud minority.
The problem is that most of those shouting for a Mr P show are freeloaders who never contribute a penny towards the tip goal. This makes the targets harder and longer to achieve as there are less then 10% of viewers who actually tip.
These shows become uneconomic especially as tipsters are wary as there are so many con shows which set a poor example.
I can see the day when the web shows are for members only and the freeloaders are stuck with the tame tv shows.
isnt it already like that ? ,apart from atlanta who gives a great free web show
That was a really good show he did with Maddison last night, she was up.for it doing lots of different positions, doggy, cowgirl, was suprised to see her submissive side as she let Mr P choke her as he fucked her she was really into this good girl, first time this has happened in a Mr P show hopefully not the last, good to see him being g the man and taking charge for once,
The show comes from one of the office now as this is how they got round some of the girls complaining they didn't like seeing a sex show, so it's behind closed doors now so most people in the studio don't see what is going on,