Elite TV / Studio 66 - General Chat & Discussion

(01-02-2015 13:26 )circles_o_o_o Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 12:07 )Broncobilly Wrote:  If a girl is pretty and puts in an effort she will get more calls than someone who does not try.

Which is more important, though?
A plain girl putting in the effort -v- a pretty girl being lazy.

You don't watch the girls if they don't appeal

(01-02-2015 13:35 )Davy Crockett Wrote:  

(01-02-2015 13:26 )circles_o_o_o Wrote:  Which is more important, though?
A plain girl putting in the effort -v- a pretty girl being lazy.

A pretty girl being lazy (obviously).

Take Danica for example. Never did much on screen, but she was said to be a recordbreaker in terms of calls.

She almost went to Babestation, but in the end they declined to meet her exorbitant wage demands.

I could easily quote other examples., because over the years there have been many pretty girls on the babe channels who met their call targets without having to try too hard.

We don't have to watch so it's up to us if a girl makes it or not

(01-02-2015 03:11 )steviebaby Wrote:  It's pretty obvious really which business model is going to be better in the long run:
1.Boring show.....most people go to bed, phone calls from the limited number of fanboys.t
2. Good visual show...everyone stays up (!,) get so horny they phone in and are willing to wait in the queue while watching the visuals.

Only problem with 2 is avoiding any large fines from OFCOM but get the balance right and the income will be sufficient to deal with this.

No disagreement with this, except that I think there is a third category: the RARE show. It's the rarity of the "extended dayshow" that, I suspect, makes them financially worthwhile for the channel. With or without any movement, a one-night-a-week show by someone like Lucy Anne will soak up all of the demand from dayshow callers indulging the whole "good girl gone bad" fantasy.

Yield management is everything. Their expectation, I think, is that most callers are motivated by biological need, not rational choice. Even if an extended day show bores them to death on a Saturday, they will still check in on the Sunday or the Monday or the Tuesday. A night of boredom won't lose s66 any more callers than RLC loses to the occasional Dom Night.

On the other hand, the extended day show "event" allows them to soak up a lot of latent demand that otherwise would not call at all. They couldn't overdo it, obviously, but so long as it's a once-a-week kind of thing, then I could see how the numbers would stack up.

^To me this whole discussion comes down to one word that was talked about on this thread a while back: Expectation.

Bronco is quite right that ultimately it is the callers who will decide whether a girl is successful at a channel or not. Unfortunately, as DavyC points out, if you expect a certain level of visual performance from a girl, it doesn't always seem to matter in regard to her call stats. If she is hot enough and does the chat okay she will get calls regardless.

Yes we are all speculating on little evidence on this thread but as no-one on here, from what I can see, has any real insider knowledge I don't see a problem with a little educated guesswork provided it is seen as such. So...

I think it's an easy trap to fall into seeing these things from a regular viewers pov. Maybe this is the way s66 see it: They obviously felt they shouldn't/couldn't run their 10-midnight slot as before. (Was this all down to Ofcom's rules or were there other factors involved?) They seem to have resolved on this daygirl thing (whether by luck, judgement or out of desperation at something else to try).

To them Saturday night line-ups in particular are probably best not geared to regular callers. Most callers would be the pissed up back from the pub types who need a quick stroke. For them there is no real thought about why the girl hasn't got less clothes on. RA makes the good point that this doesn't really matter to her desirability unless you are expecting it and are disappointed by not getting what you want to see. To a non-regular it would be just: "That bit I saw once when flicking through in the daytime has her ass out flashing her thong. I'm having some of that..."

It seems the hot enough day babe can get the most of these fresh caller types (as they have little expectation of what a night show traditionally entails). Add this to the girls day fans looking to see a bit extra from the "event" and you have a double whammy of callers.

In other words regular night girls get a regular amount of punters, day girls on nights get at least the normal amount plus her existing fans.

Indeed between 10pm and midnight, exactly the lucy-anne type slot, with plenty of this type of caller backed up it is not even in the girl's interest to keep the guy on the call for that long. Expectation is less on the audio side too. Better to keep those connection fees racking up.

For the channel all this also has the happy side-effect of lowering viewer expectations for the future. It becomes the new norm. And is now well within Ofcom's rules. Takings up and no fines = Result!

Managing expectation and appealing to the right crowds. Does that sound plausible for what's going on here?

(29-01-2015 22:38 )ShandyHand Wrote:  P.S. Technical question: Does anyone know if the guy on the trigger works on a delayed feed? I mean does he get the video 5 seconds or something before it hits the air and make the choice to go to logo before the supposedly offending bit is shown? Just curious... Thought that might explain some of the seemingly hair trigger responses if he see more than we do, earlier, so to speak.

I've been wondering about this. Wouldn't such a delay be immediately appararent to someone on the phone? How could you have a proper conversation if you were watching a delayed feed?
Also there are lots of occasions where you see air trigger responses that are simply false alarms; the feed is only lost for a split second or so and no infraction occours. If they were operating on a delay, then in theory, you wouldn't see these poxy false alarms.

There is always a delay if you watch football on tv and listen to the commentary on radio you will notice this

(29-01-2015 22:38 )ShandyHand Wrote:  Technical question: Does anyone know if the guy on the trigger works on a delayed feed? I mean does he get the video 5 seconds or something before it hits the air and make the choice to go to logo before the supposedly offending bit is shown?

Yes, the answer can be found in the information scrolling along the bottom of the TV screen:

"For technical reasons the broadcast you see may be delayed by up to 15 seconds."

I don't know the rules on what can be showed on tv as opposed to watching as it is streamed on the internet. If you watch the stream then why is this censored? Or technically is there no way they can show uncensored, meaning if the logo goes up on the tv screen, then it goes up on the stream also.

(01-02-2015 15:56 )steviebaby Wrote:  

(29-01-2015 22:38 )ShandyHand Wrote:  ...Does anyone know if the guy on the trigger works on a delayed feed? ...

I've been wondering about this. Wouldn't such a delay be immediately apparent to someone on the phone? How could you have a proper conversation if you were watching a delayed feed?
Also there are lots of occasions where you see air trigger responses that are simply false alarms; the feed is only lost for a split second or so and no infraction occours. If they were operating on a delay, then in theory, you wouldn't see these poxy false alarms.

I worded my original question poorly sorry.

What the guy on the trigger sees he sees seconds before us. (Up to 15 seconds according to the OSG - thanks Mellow.) He can rewind back and blank out any bits he sees as dodgy with the logo; but mostly he would just press for it to go up it 'as live' if he thinks some thing's about to be shown that he thinks is a problem 'cause he's got to be quick about it. He can, obviously, still get it wrong and put the logo up incorrectly if he's a bit jumpy. What he does goes out regardless of whether he put the logo up for good reason or not. He hasn't got the time or inclination to be correcting his mistakes.

As for callers well they just have to put up with the slight delay between what they are hearing and what they are seeing.

As Bronco says it's a system that's used for the broadcast of many live events on TV. Helps bleep out certain edgy concert artists' swearing for one!

(01-02-2015 17:50 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote:  I don't know the rules on what can be showed on tv as opposed to watching as it is streamed on the internet. If you watch the stream then why is this censored? Or technically is there no way they can show uncensored, meaning if the logo goes up on the tv screen, then it goes up on the stream also.

I should imagine that if the webstream differed from the TV stream it would come under Ofcom's ATVOD arm these days as it's not behind a paywall and s66 are a UK-based company. Ofcom have them all ways, so the webstream has to be the same as the TV feed.

Doesn't stop them sticking a second camera in the studio for a web-only angle though I don't think. Any such stream would have to be behind a paywall to placate our friendly neighbourhood quango if it was to show anything stronger than the regular feed.

This would probably be too challenging technically for their type of operation (ie. a cheap one!) at the moment and prone to very dangerous cock-up possibilities. "Ooops I've just put the wrong feed out on Freeview."

Just curious..... how can Babestation transmit Unleashed, without out OFCOM stopping them. It is NOT behind a pay wall?