Elite TV / Studio 66 - General Chat & Discussion

(23-02-2015 01:33 )Bandwagon Wrote:  please chalk me down for the '10 o'clock = tits out club' and tar me with that stereotypical, narrow minded lads brush - what the hell

Put me down for the same club too! I'm very much old school. I can't understand the mentality of a caller who wouldn't want something racier at that time of night either, but they would seem to have a different mindset.

(23-02-2015 01:44 )mr mystery Wrote:  It's the strength in depth of the night girls not being good that has led to them using day girls at night imo .

This is a very good call mr mystery. You outline a very likely scenario. And a more hopeful one for the future. If it was the defections themselves that lead to this course of action from s66 then as has been said there is a possibility of a reversal in the future if the right (experienced?) night girls can be (re-)recruited.

I would add one caveat however: I come back to the question of why all these experienced night girls would leave the channel in such a short space of time? Add in a possible trouble recruiting established names, even though by all accounts they are not afraid to splash big money on shifts, and you have something seeming a little off to say the least.

Could it be that the new restrictions being imposed on what the girls can do on-screen proved too much for those that left or was it 'personality clashes' with the new owners perhaps? I'm sure everyone can think of non-monetary reasons people leave a place of work. Whatever reason(s) you care to come up with it doesn't look good multiplied by so many names.

We may even have a chicken and the egg situation. Did s66 wanting to move to tamer shows cause the very situation they are now stuck with? Which came first?

Not that it really matters. I just hope mr mystery is right and this is something they are pursuing out of necessity for now and they are not trying to reinvent the whole night time structure.

Tori left Storm so maybe they can tempt her?

Tori would be a very astute acquisition imo .

(23-02-2015 00:37 )Bandwagon Wrote:  Isn't it ironic how women always like to tar us blokes with the same brush.... "only ever after one thing"

As long as we are pointing out ironies, have you ever seen the business correspondents on Fox News?

If they had a forum, all I would want to talk about is sex

Dear S66, if you do indeed sign Tori up and make all Joey's dreams come true in one sitting, would you please then get me Tammy Taylor back? I promise not to slag you off again Also, if you fetch Sarah Matty and Jodie Gasson back and get them on proper nights then fuck it, I'll change my name to Band-Rascal and take up the front line with Rammy.

Kind regards and best wishes, Bandwagon

I don’t believe that s66 has “wanted” to move to tamer shows, as has been suggested above. I don’t see any reason why they would want to move to tamer shows. If they feel pressured because of Ofcom, then that I can understand. But why else would they “want” to move to tamer shows? I don’t see them as a channel whose only interest is in getting the viewers to purchase their other products by deliberately frustrating them with tame content... Yes, I do believe that there is one producer at s66 who wants nothing but tamer shows (because of his own dislike of women and confused sexuality). But I do not see him as being representative of s66 as a whole, even though his influence does seem to be very apparent.

I could be wrong - but Jamie seems to be someone who listens to public opinion and tries to accommodate the public whenever he can. Obviously he cannot please everyone, and is sure to disappoint many of us just because of the restrictions imposed by Ofcom. But I get the impression that he would genuinely like to satisfy the viewing public and is someone who is really passionately opposed to Ofcom‘s idiocy, although his hands are relatively tied in this regard.

I am sure that there is much that I am ignorant of, as I do not frequently read the threads. So if there is something that I am missing that is currently taking place at s66 I would welcome being enlightened.

I also do not think that it is fair that the girls get the blame for the lame and timid nature of their shows. They - for the most part - are being made the scapegoats for petty-minded producers and sick misogynist who dictate what they are permitted to do. Yes, some girls get away with more exciting shows than others (always dependent on what is being permitted by any given producer). Yes, some of the girls would not be very exciting in their performances even if they had the permission from the producers or Ofcom; but I do believe that the general public are very much in the dark about the unseen influences (producers, politicians, men with power and influence who simply feel threatened by women). These, I am convinced, are the real enemies of what we get to see of the girls on screen.

(23-02-2015 20:14 )Bandwagon Wrote:  Dear S66, if you do indeed sign Tori up and make all Joey's dreams come true in one sitting, would you please then get me Tammy Taylor back? I promise not to slag you off again Also, if you fetch Sarah Matty and Jodie Gasson back and get them on proper nights then fuck it, I'll change my name to Band-Rascal and take up the front line with Rammy.

Kind regards and best wishes, Bandwagon

And if you get Abbey B and Caitlin Wynters on nights, get Cara Brett doing full nightshows, sign Rachel Taylor to do regular nightshows and promise to use a jacuzzi and shower set every single night I might join the club .

*How big a whip round would it take to change Clares mind? .

(23-02-2015 17:23 )ShandyHand Wrote:  I come back to the question of why all these experienced night girls would leave the channel in such a short space of time? Add in a possible trouble recruiting established names, even though by all accounts they are not afraid to splash big money on shifts, and you have something seeming a little off to say the least.

You need to apply the principle of Occam's razor. Look for the simplest solution.

Let me explain. From 2012 to 2013 Cellcast lost 19% of their revenue. Yes as much as 19% in a single year, due to what they describe as declining demand for their services. It's hard to believe that Studio 66 haven't been similarly hit. Why would they be exempt from the market conditions that Babestation operate in?

I have no evidence of Studio 66's turnover, but it's a fair bet that it's been hit in the same way as Babestation. The question then arises of how to cope with such a downturn? The answer at Cellcast is to sell properties to cover their Babestation losses. A couple of major sales have covered the huge losses that Babestation have racked up recently (although they will eventually run out of things to sell).

So what of Studio 66? Well they have nothing to sell, so they can't go down the Babestation route of racking up losses in the millions and covering them by selling other assets. Comparing Studio 66 to Babestation is like comparing your local corner shop to Tesco.

So given that Studio 66 haven't got anything they can sell to cover losses, they have to make sure instead that they don't rack up such losses in the first place, and in a market of declining demand that can only mean cutting costs. If they were losing millions like Babestation they must be out of business by now, so they simply have to exercise careful cost control.

Doesn't this leave them vulnerable to having their presenters picked off by the offer of higher pay elsewhere? Yes, you bet it does. Babestation have had a policy for sometime of picking off Studio 66 girls by offering higher pay, and an ex-Babestation producer said in this forum that Studio 66 losing girls to Babestation was a sure thing.

You asked why all these experienced night girls would leave the channel in such a short space of time? And I'm telling you again to forget any fancy explanations and apply the principle of Occam's razor. Money talks.

Babestation have been able to pursue their policy of picking off Studio 66 girls because despite losses in the millions - £2.5m in 2013 alone - they are a relatively big business and have the means to cover those losses for now. Studio 66 have no hope whatever of covering losses like that and consequently they simply can't compete with Babestation when they come calling for their girls. This is the reality of the situation.

Assuming that Studio 66 have experienced a similar downturn in demand as Babestation in the last few years, they are in that case doing pretty well to survive as well as they have. Still running 4 channels more or less (I know they 'rent' a channel to Xtreme Filth, but I assume the rent is some kind of revshare, so Studio 66 are still earning from it). And even though their night girls are being routinely picked off, they still have a strong daytime lineup at the moment - which is presumably why they are trying to make the most of it just now.

What of the future? Well in their last published results Cellcast announced ANOTHER drop of 19% in their revenues, so we may be in a downward spiral here which nobody can stop. I suspect the channels won't ever disappear, but if things carry on the way they are we may see considerable downsizing. Look at how Red Light have shed a channel and also now only have 2 girls in the morning instead of 3 on their remaining channels.

When was the last time we had a new channel? Oh yes Euro Babes, lasted all of 6 days. But that wasn't a new operator anyway. I mean when did we have an entirely new operator in the market? Not for some time, because who in their right mind would want to get into this business now?

I give great credit to Studio 66 because despite terribly declining demand as people head off to their favourite webcam sites instead of tuning in to the TV channels, and despite their very limited financial status, and despite Babestation picking off their presenters at will, they still somehow carry on regardless, always finding a way to keep going and maintain as many as 4 channels (more or less). There's something admirable about their refusal to bow down and let the supermarket conquer them.

Sounds like Babestation could do with hiring some of the business consultants from Fox News for a bit of multi-tasking.

(23-02-2015 20:41 )admiral decker Wrote:  I give great credit to Studio 66 because despite terribly declining demand as people head off to their favourite webcam sites instead of tuning in to the TV channels, and despite their very limited financial status, and despite Babestation picking off their presenters at will, they still somehow carry on regardless, always finding a way to keep going and maintain as many as 4 channels (more or less). There's something admirable about their refusal to bow down and let the supermarket conquer them.

STD 66 have themselves got a history of picking off as you call it girls from other channels by offering them more money, ie, Lori Buckby said STD 66 offered her "silly money" to join them and leave BB .
Recently Xpanded and RLC, to name 2 channels have been their main targets, they have just picked off Ella Jolie from RLC, before that Kandi Kay, Keira Knight, Mellie D, Lucy Summers, Yasmine James, Delia Rose , Olivia Berzinc were all picked off from RLC .
Then there is the Xpanded girls they have recently picked off as well, (which i have forgot the names of lol)

When STD 66 or Elite as it was called back then first started they picked off girls mainly from Bang babes and BS

So you could say what goes round comes round, it looks like BS are giving them a taste of their own medicine after having their own girls picked off by STD 66.