Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion

(12-04-2014 07:45 )snookered147 Wrote:  

(11-04-2014 19:21 )Tractor boy Wrote:  Perhaps in 30 years the daughters of our fave babes will be on bs

Let us hope there is more to look forward to in 30 years time than revised techniques in phone waving and pic plugging .

I expect there will always be phone waving & pic plugging as this is how they make money
no calls = no shows

I thought the idea was to have somebody on the end of the phone
A bit like we're supposed to have someone on the end of our dick's instead of shaking it back at the TV

To add to my previous recent posts..........
I am finding my enthusiasm and willingness to call the shows is ever dwindling.
Many of you will know just how much of a regular caller I have been to the shows over quite a long time span.
So why are my calls slowly on what seems like a terminal decline?
Well part of it is an ever increasing sense of protest against over zealous regulation by OFCOM, channels who seem intent on mutual destruction rather than unified ambition and quality and an ever increasing feeling that the attitude of some babes is too much of the up their own arse, cannot be bothered variety.
This in combination with the apparent contempt SOME channels and SOME babes seem to have for callers and non callers alike has finally caught up with me to the point where I have lost patience.
I no longer see as much fun or point in bothering because there seems to be an ever more prevalent attitude problem.
The priorities are all wrong and I as a viewer and caller am now less willing to for example ring up Babe A to strip naked as I am now asking myself......
Why bother? The on screen babe has rarely done anything to merit the cost of my call before I dial and more often than not once I have finished my call the panties go back on and the excitement stops.
Back to plain old phone waving and lying there about as horny as a brick.
Is this down to producer instruction or babes saying "no calls no nakedness".
Probably a bit of both but whatever is causing it leaves me feeling profoundly disillusioned and disappointed .
There will be those who I will continue to call but this will be on the basis now of who I think merits me parting with my money as much on the basis of attitude as performance.
Those who don't whinge about every damned thing, those that don't give off a distainful attitude towards callers and viewers alike, those that don't spout out obnoxious insensitive nonsense on social media, those that don't phone wave and clockwatch their way to another ill deserved pay cheque.
Those that do listen to the callers rather than having a conversation with cameraman and or producer when they are meant to be talking to the caller.
Those that do mix up outfits and sets.
Those that do listen and care. Those that want to put on a show without conditions being placed on such a prospect.
And yes they do exist.
I would venture to suggest these nightshow babes get paid more for 3 nights work than I do in a month.
Even accounting for the fact they work unsociable hours I think it only reasonable to expect them to be given the tools (i.e quality sets) to put on top quality shows by their channel. And more to the point the babes themselves should be putting on displays worthy of the cost of the calls.
Call it an unrealistic expectation if you like.
In the meantime I will give the babes who consistently tick my boxes some calls .

How come so many of the babe show babes past or present are called either Paige or Candy? I've never met a real person who actually exists who went by either of these names, and I've been to Greenock.

Someone needs to look into this.

How come so many of them have boys' names? Like Charlie, Danni, Georgie, Sammie, Terrie, etc.

(21-04-2014 12:29 )circles_o_o_o Wrote:  How come so many of them have boys' names? Like Charlie, Danni, Georgie, Sammie, Terrie, etc.

In Danni Levy's case that would be because her parents called her Danielle!

(21-04-2014 12:29 )circles_o_o_o Wrote:  How come so many of them have boys' names? Like Charlie, Danni, Georgie, Sammie, Terrie, etc.

Because they aren't boy's names.

Charlie = Charlotte (or possibly Charlene)
Danni = Danielle (or possibly Danica)
Georgie = Georgina (or possibly Georgia)
Sammie = Samantha (or possibly Samira)
Terrie = Teresa (or possibly Terilynn)

That question would have worked better on the radio

(21-04-2014 13:40 )circles_o_o_o Wrote:  That question would have worked better on the radio

I sometimes think the Babeshows would too

(21-04-2014 09:40 )Phonebook Wrote:  How come so many of the babe show babes past or present are called either Paige or Candy? I've never met a real person who actually exists who went by either of these names, and I've been to Greenock.

Someone needs to look into this.

OK sir, I looked into it.

Paige is one of the UK's most popular girl's names. The Office for National Statistics ranks it 80th on its latest list, ahead of Sarah, Rebecca, Jennifer, Rachel, Zoe, Maria and Laura.

Candy isn't very popular and fails to make the UK's top 1,000 girl's names. I did a US check for comparison (as the name originates in America) and it's current ranking there is 946.