Elite TV / Studio 66 - General Chat & Discussion

(05-04-2015 22:28 )snookered147 Wrote:  

(05-04-2015 22:26 )Block Wrote:  So snookered, i'm assuming that you would like the channels to provide more bedsets?

Only for the trash yard

In general I would wholeheartedly agree with you, with one exception, the "real" bed sets where they can use the quilt and go naked are great, especially with Kandi in there

(06-04-2015 08:44 )Block Wrote:  snip

Well we now have the 10 til midnight daytime extra show so I suppose it's only a matter of time before we get the 10 til 5.30 am daytime extra show.

How the mighty have fallen....

(06-04-2015 09:35 )steviebaby Wrote:  In general I would wholeheartedly agree with you, with one exception, the "real" bed sets where they can use the quilt and go naked are great, especially with Kandi in there

You make a good point there Steve, the bed sets can be good if they are used correctly. The quilt can be a nice touch to help with those 'nearly' moments
But as you know, they can also induce lazy arsed performances that hardly make a phone call seem worthwhile.
Speaking of Kandi, I was actually looking forward to getting involved again last night. But after reading about the fleecing going on again along with the crap lighting, I didn't bother. I'm sure my 'drop in the ocean' lack of contribution will go unnoticed, but as the famous supermarket slogan goes "every little helps"

(06-04-2015 07:26 )Bandwagon Wrote:  The prices these top-end channels charge is bad enough, but to then be deliberately fucked over by silly games is an outrage.They're trying to keep the queue moving to stop people hanging up, so ultimately everybody gets seemingly close, but nobody actually gets much of fuck all in the end.
Nothing new, but still just as shitty, condolences to all who have lost out to this bullshit.

What might be useful is information of where you are in the queue; if I can listen to a couple of people before I get board and hang up. I don't get why they cut off callers after a couple of minutes because its just lost money surely (and if you're like me, a bloody minded one who won't call again). This "my phones logged out/went wrong" thing is I'm afraid complete tosh - I spend all day dialled into a VoIP system and it never goes wrong - when was the last time you got cut off from a call centre (without someone pressing the wrong button by accident).

As you say Bandwagon is just cynical queue management

An interesting night on S66 last night I thought, with some very contrasting performance styles:
Cara looks very langorous and has a naughty look on her face. She has a tendency to have her tummy stapled to the bed, but isn't afraid to get her knickers off, unlike some "big names" on S66.
Kerrie Lee is also new to me. She's got loads of energy and is very liberal with the oil! For me her boobs look out of proportion to her small frame, but she certainly puts on a lively show.
Kandi was relatively quiet last night compared to some of her shows. One annoying habit she seems to have acquired is to say she's going to go naked in a bit and then doesn't (second time in as many shows). Have the callers been naughty and not rung her enough?!

(06-04-2015 08:44 )Block Wrote:  ...It is better to have a long term relationship with your customer, getting them to come back again and again.

This phone system nonsense might give them short term gains in profit...

This is exactly what 66 are doing, putting short-term gain over long-term customer loyalty. I suppose they can justify it to themselves by saying it's only for a couple of hours a week - callers will cut them some slack and put it down to the demand Cara creates. But as you say it is incredibly short-sighted as they surely have little idea of how many people they are inspiring to simply give up calling. (Potentially, they could data mine their phone logs to analyse customer retention for repeated shows like Cara's but can anyone really see 66 paying for this?)

At least, judging by what Paul Ducky overheard, Cara doesn't seem to be in on this 'craftiness' (kindest word I could find for it). Although, in her stilettos, she would have to be pretty ostrich-like not to ask where her 'silly' money wages are coming from. Here's a shock Cara, even call stats can be misleading if they are manipulated!

(06-04-2015 10:38 )hairbald Wrote:  

(06-04-2015 07:26 )Bandwagon Wrote:  ...They're trying to keep the queue moving to stop people hanging up, so ultimately everybody gets seemingly close, but nobody actually gets much of fuck all in the end...

...I don't get why they cut off callers after a couple of minutes because its just lost money surely (and if you're like me, a bloody minded one who won't call again)...

66 have created some 'exclusivity demand' with Cara's shows. They are exploiting that by churning the phone management system to create an illusion of movement towards getting through to her when in reality there is little to be had. You knowing where you are in the queue would not help 66 do this. Don't forget they can see the same cut-off people calling straight back (at even greater expense) - presumably because they have had a tiny taste of the promised land. Having a few callers hog Cara eventually creates bored/frustrated listeners-in like you say and they would gradually drop off. On such a short duration show, they see it as better to create the perfect storm of apparent phone problems with the occasion glimpse of heaven... at least better for their immediate bank balance.

(06-04-2015 01:43 )mrmann Wrote:  I think it's horrible too, but it doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Also, how many people will actually complain, and would the police even care? I doubt it. Ofcon might, but then again, do we want to give more ammo to Ofcon?

Here's a little fable for Easter Monday...

Once upon a time, there was a babeshow channel. A lot of the girls on it were behaving badly. And not the good kind of bad They were muting their phones, ignoring callers, and leaving them in the queue for unreasonable amounts of time. In the meantime, through the dark forest and over the hill, a thread appeared on a Forum far away. Post after post after post reported the same old problem. Like the Big Bad Wolf, the owner of the channel would sometimes appear on the forum to spout utter nonsense and drivel, which just got the members more and more irate.

One day, one of those members (not this one, I might add) suggested that we tell Ofcom about what was going on. The problem had been festering for so long that about half-a-dozen other posters agreed with him and the thread went off on a little tangent about this possibility. A revolution was a-brewing.

Within a few hours though, all of those posts were deleted. We were told that this was a red herring and that the information conveyed about Ofcom was inaccurate and misleading -- it was not Ofcom's job, after all, to monitor premium rate phone services. (For anyone who is interested, those complaints should go to Phonepayplus). Even so, one couldn't shake the suspicion that there was something else going on. That maybe some of these guys had been so ripped off and were so evidently irritated that they might actually make good on their threat to report the channel.

The underlying message was clear. The channels were having enough trouble with the Sherriff of Ofcom. They didn't need us -- the supposed fans and supporters of the channels? -- to make things worse by fanning the flames of discontent in the Kingdom. For the most part, we all got back in our box and the furore died away. But a funny thing then happened. Within a matter of days of that whole 'kerfuffle', all of the bad behavior by the channel just stopped. The girls went back to answering their phones. Everything went back to normal. (Or at least we thought it did, until a beautiful princess turned up on another channel and all of this shit started up again, but that's another story).

Was it a coincidence? Maybe. Did someone from the forum have a word in the ear of the producers? "Guys, we contained the revolution this time, but you'd better get your act together or people really will start to lodge complaints against you." Possibly.

What is the moral of this story? I'm not sure. Maybe we are the mugs. We dedicate our time and effort to a Forum that celebrates and defends these damn shows and then -- when they take the piss and rip us off -- we restrain ourselves from complaining out of our ingrained instinct to defend them in spite of themselves and in spite of ourselves. And it begs an existential question about this forum. Is it a 'voice' for viewers and callers or is it the first line of defense for the channels? It is one thing to defend the channels from an army of prudes that would have them shut down for fear that an errant nipple will lead to the downfall of western civilization. It is quite another thing to defend the channels from the complaints of the very callers who are, after all, keeping the f*&kers in business.

Take from that parable what you will, fellas. It was my very longwinded response to mrmann's ethical quandary about whether or not the channel should be reported.

I say: complain and let the channel be damned, mrmann.

I know I will.

Just how many final straws can there be in respect of any one channel? In the list of cardinal sin errors and failings S66 has pretty much now committed every single one, a lot of them on a regular basis.
The way the calls are seeming to be, shall we say 'controlled beyond the caller' is perhaps the most damning indictment on a channel that has already brought shame and piss taking upon itself for way too long.
For me S66 as a channel has made itself a laughing stock, a target for fury and intense criticism.
The lack of variety of sets, the feeble production, the lack of intensity and energy, the inept scheduling, the logoitis and the loss of so many established performers has spoken volume enough. But for the integrity of a channel to come into question through the suspicion of call scamming.
That truly is unforgivable.
The most reprehensible of sins.
I and it seems rather too many people have suffered because of this before. The fact that my calls have largely dried up due to the general quality of shows is sheer coincidence.
But now I am faced with a question.
Do I choose to ever phone anyone on S66 again no matter what the quality of the show on screen?
Incompetence is one thing.
The merest hint or suggestion of disreputability and dishonesty in call control is quite another.
S66 are, it seems, in the forum dock for something way more serious than just the failings of their visual output.

(06-04-2015 12:02 )Goodfella3041 Wrote:  Here's a little fable for Easter Monday...

...I say: complain and let the channel be damned, mrmann.

I know I will.

Jeez, I thought I was long-winded! I'm kidding, top post.

Whenever complaints or campaigns are suggested you have to give yourself a moments thought don't you. After all these are just babe shows. But some issues go beyond the shows themselves. This is people's hard-earned we are talking about.

I had no idea this sort of scenario had occurred before Goodfella. Oh I imagined the manipulation had happened before but not to the extent of it provoking a concerted response on here.

What outcome are you looking for this time? The same as last or some sort of general complaint to an external body?

In any case, surely if there is one thing this forum should do, it is support and celebrate the babe shows when they are done in the best fashion. On the other hand, what 66 are doing with Cara's callers goes beyond poor and into bringing the shows down. So, it does deserve to be reported in some way.

As a caller directly effected by this I hope you get a positive result on this one and I hope some others who have been ripped off step into line behind you. I may not have been caught out in this personally but if you need any support, help or a name putting to anything (real or user) I for one would back you.

The first step should be a complaint to the channel seeking a refund and explanation. I doubt any regulator would look at a complaint unless the channel had been given the chance to put things right themselves first.