The UK Babe Channels Forum

(22-05-2019 16:36 )Chrisst Wrote: [ -> ]Who's this Houdini, sort of appeared from nowhere, I think she's webcam only, seems a bit hot.

https://twitter.com/HoudiniXx

I've heard the name before. But where it escapes me

^^^^Good post docutech. It always adds splendidly to the debate to hear a clear babes' perspective on things. Thank you for taking the time to illicit this for us.

I would only perhaps take issue with the pov in the last paragraph. Don't you think it'll be the market's influence that will ultimately decide what goes on on the web onlys, not the hesistant babes? I mean those that resist the requirements of their paying audience, and the vision the latter has for the format, longterm, will be left behind.

If I may say, it can feel as if some babes in recent times have grown too used to everything that they do on the shows being contained - either by TV regulations or by the protection offered in the seclusion of their paywall only fare. Guys will put up with the babes doing as they please for the latter (in what is seen as exclusively their own arena) but the web only shows are by their very nature quite a different beast. The sheer fta visibility, the transparency that offers, means there is a direct and open competition to contend with on the new form that was less sway on these other formats. (Competition was artifically suppressed by Ofcom's levellings on TV but that doesn't apply here.)

Your babes admit punter expectation is there. And it's not going away is it? It can be massaged but not eradicated. Only protectionist instruction from the operators and collaboration between babes might, for the time being, maintain a certain style of working on the web onlys. This will no doubt combat a drift to harder levels as dictated by this competition to some extent. But such unity has a habit of not holding fast for long. Unregulated I feel (and hope) that they'll will always be one or two ambitious babes looking to do more, give a better level of service to both cameras, in order to get ahead.

So... the drift to somewhat harder levels may be slower than punters would like and sporadic - held back completely at times no doubt... it may not go far enough for some punter's liking... but the drift will be there all the same. 

I feel the market will have a bigger hand in deciding what levels are successful on the web onlys than these babe's foresee. That is a freedom the punter gets when there is no government backed interference in a platform (at least as far as allowable content goes). If guys think the format is beholden of a better service, better levels of performance, than is being offered they are right to keep asking for it. This time, there is nothing external in the way.

It'll be interesting to see where we are a year (or more) from now.
I wonder what some of our '10 years men' think about how the channels have developed.

(22-05-2019 18:05 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]^^^^Good post docutech. It always adds splendidly to the debate to hear a clear babes' perspective on things. Thank you for taking the time to illicit this for us.

I would only perhaps take issue with the pov in the last paragraph. Don't you think it'll be the market's influence that will ultimately decide what goes on on the web onlys, not the hesistant babes? I mean those that resist the requirements of their paying audience, and the vision the latter has for the format, longterm, will be left behind.

If I may say, it can feel as if some babes in recent times have grown too used to everything that they do on the shows being contained - either by TV regulations or by the protection offered in the seclusion of their paywall only fare. Guys will put up with the babes doing as they please for the latter (in what is seen as exclusively their own arena) but the web only shows are by their very nature quite a different beast. The sheer fta visibility, the transparency that offers, means there is a direct and open competition to contend with on the new form that was less sway on these other formats. (Competition was artifically suppressed by Ofcom's levellings on TV but that doesn't apply here.)

Your babes admit punter expectation is there. And it's not going away is it? It can be massaged but not eradicated. Only protectionist instruction from the operators and collaboration between babes might, for the time being, maintain a certain style of working on the web onlys. This will no doubt combat a drift to harder levels as dictated by this competition to some extent. But such unity has a habit of not holding fast for long. Unregulated I feel (and hope) that they'll will always be one or two ambitious babes looking to do more, give a better level of service to both cameras, in order to get ahead.

So... the drift to somewhat harder levels may be slower than punters would like and sporadic - held back completely at times no doubt... it may not go far enough for some punter's liking... but the drift will be there all the same. 

I feel the market will have a bigger hand in deciding what levels are successful on the web onlys than these babe's foresee. That is a freedom the punter gets when there is no government backed interference in a platform (at least as far as allowable content goes). If guys think the format is beholden of a better service, better levels of performance, than is being offered they are right to keep asking for it. This time, there is nothing external in the way.

Be interesting to see how it goes shift wise, I understand 66's have liked initially to keep the girls on TV (or give most day TV shifts) to ones who historically gain most TV call mins.

The breakfast shows are different some girls are still getting them as part of their TV quota, but I don't think there is any hard and fast rule how many they get of each when it comes to days, but a policy of web unless we tell you otherwise is likely.

The issue has arisen that some girls callers are not transferring over to web-stream (myself being a potential example) as I feel the call experience is not as good as when on TV.

I have noticed some say 8 hour shifts are being split web / TV (which is good) and web has crept into very early morning too, girls especially those with lots of cam / nudity experience will love it as web-stream is often incentive based and can make them more money than a standard TV shift ..or less though.

I enjoy the thrill of web-stream but it needs to split properly between the two mediums, though that could be difficult as TV options may well disappear soon so less available TV time / shifts.

Houdini eh? Is she part of the Weiss squad? (Escapologist Harry Houdini's real name was Erich Weiss) Surely that's not her real name?

Does 66 actually have a guide anywhere that explicitly states who is going to be doing the web-only shows that particular day?

(29-05-2019 11:21 )Robot Devil Wrote: [ -> ]Does 66 actually have a guide anywhere that explicitly states who is going to be doing the web-only shows that particular day?

I'm not sure I want one. It's like turning up to take out Significant Other and she says. ''Let's have a night in''.

Another recycled 'Babe' in Kaitlin Laken on this afternoon.

Surely, there are better options?

(29-05-2019 11:21 )Robot Devil Wrote: [ -> ]Does 66 actually have a guide anywhere that explicitly states who is going to be doing the web-only shows that particular day?

I think many babes are told their shifts are web based unless circumstances dictate otherwise on the day, though those who historically obtain higher TV minutes from calls will get a higher percentage of TV shifts planned, there is also a growing use of splitting a shift TV and web some keeping both mediums and user groups happy.