Elite TV / Studio 66 - General Chat & Discussion

So, when did Morgan Preece decide to return to the Babechannels?! On S66!!!

(03-01-2020 22:30 )icy12 Wrote:  So, when did Morgan Preece decide to return to the Babechannels?! On S66!!!

she just does web cam shows on there and several other cam sites

(03-01-2020 22:06 )icy12 Wrote:  So, it goes from an 8-girl A-list schedule to a 6-girl shitfest in a blink of an eye.

Preeti Young, Charley Green, Chloe L, Faye Rampton, Lucy G & Brooke Lea is a “shitfest”. Completely disagree as would others

Bet you wouldn’t say this if it was the lineup on BS, Xpanded or one of the online babeshows

A bit bizarre that loads of people that Babestation are losing loads of girls recently...

BS are clearly streamlining their channel and they don't waste airtime like S66 does.

S66 is clearly a struggling channel and they have way too many girls on their roster at present. We shall see who lasts the longest.

And yes, earlier was a shitfest.

Where's Mia Middleton then? She was only about for a couple of days! Bizarre

(04-01-2020 01:36 )icy12 Wrote:  A bit bizarre that loads of people that Babestation are losing loads of girls recently...

BS are clearly streamlining their channel and they don't waste airtime like S66 does.

S66 is clearly a struggling channel and they have way too many girls on their roster at present. We shall see who lasts the longest.

And yes, earlier was a shitfest.

Where's Mia Middleton then? She was only about for a couple of days! Bizarre

Mia is currently scheduled to be on later today (Saturday) 3pm-10pm & on Sunday 5:30am-Noon

rubbish to say bs wastes airtime like s66 apparently does when they have a channel (908) that doesn’t even have babes on it anymore and to say s66 is “clearly struggling” when it has one more night channel (on Sky) than bs, had 8 babes on during the day at one point on Friday & has 6 babes on tonight

Nothing to me suggest s66 is struggling as bad as you and the other s66 “doom mongers” are claiming

(04-01-2020 01:36 )icy12 Wrote:  S66 is clearly a struggling channel

It's clear to you because you're so heavily biased. You tend to see what you want to see. It's something known as confirmation bias.

You don't understand that your dislike of many Studio66 girls is merely your subjective opinion, and not an observable objective fact.

(03-01-2020 18:11 )Chrisst Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 17:49 )hornball Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 17:44 )Chrisst Wrote:  We must, if we can, come to some realistic consensus of opinion about any given issue if our comments are to be respected by the channel's managers on the occasion that they read them.

You aren't serious …..I mean...….really serious ….are you?? If that was likely, I suspect it would have already happened, and given the available feedback, would have led to changes! That hasn't happened obviously!

Completely serious.
Look how quickly the split screen on Freeview disappeared. We all condemned it and I read that one of the babes said it was the boss's idea.

I think it's more likely calls went through the floor, and that's why they stopped it.

(04-01-2020 07:45 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 18:11 )Chrisst Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 17:49 )hornball Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 17:44 )Chrisst Wrote:  We must, if we can, come to some realistic consensus of opinion about any given issue if our comments are to be respected by the channel's managers on the occasion that they read them.

You aren't serious …..I mean...….really serious ….are you?? If that was likely, I suspect it would have already happened, and given the available feedback, would have led to changes! That hasn't happened obviously!

Completely serious.
Look how quickly the split screen on Freeview disappeared. We all condemned it and I read that one of the babes said it was the boss's idea.

I think it's more likely calls went through the floor, and that's why they stopped it.

The silence of the silent majority.

(03-01-2020 17:44 )Chrisst Wrote:  

(03-01-2020 13:22 )southlondonphil Wrote:  The problem with you prophets of doom is that you've been saying the same thing for at least 5 years. Being persistently wrong doesn't seem to deter you though.

As recently as November the predictions were that Studio 66 wouldn't make it to the end of the year. Now the prediction is amended once again to set a new deadline and so it goes on.

We must, if we can, come to some realistic consensus of opinion about any given issue if our comments are to be respected by the channel's managers on the occasion that they read them.

Phil says nothing about whether or not he agrees that there are problems with 66's output (he doesn't need to) only that he doesn't concur with the predictions of what will result from what they are doing atm. (It has to be said he is quite right too - the stations' deaths have been predicted far too often on here for any given instance to be properly credible at this point.)

The implication of his statement would appear sound also: The judgements of a fair amount of posters as to what is or isn't financially sound for the operators is flawed. We might even stretch the point further and suggest that what turns out to be profitable for the channels is not what these guys are looking for from the shows (i.e. they are judging the situation emotively rather than with cold rational and logic).

This all hints at problems with your idea Chrisst...

IMO, you'll never get consensus from any group of punters about apparent 'issues' on the shows. There are too many guys looking for too many different things therein. Too many guys who will only ever assess with a clouded subjective eye. Too many guys wanting to see things that are not financially viable for the operators. Posters that know the score on the latter, and/or those who are concerned to financially support their favourite babe(s), would never agree with the former group.

Truth is the operators don't necessarily want to put out 'good shows' in any case (only lucrative ones) so why would their bosses listen overmuch? Their sole motivation really is to make the most money they can, as easily (cheaply) as possible. Putting out good shows and making the most profit are not always compatible, so they would not necessarily be looking to implement the sort of suggestions you're thinking of. 

This is the problem with the idea that operators should take absolute note of any attempt at mediation from punter groups: When the industry is an exploitative one the needs of each party don't always coincide. We can only really hope for a correlation some of the time at best. That common ground is actually the consesus the thinking punter should be seeking. What we should be asking for IMO is reduction in the level of consumer exploitation (the deceptions, the lack of service consistency, the dirth of transparency) and for them to find more empathetic ways to make their dough. Ones that induce feelings of lasting positivity in the punter not negativity. But, as has been said, they hardly have a reputation for listening.

All the same, trying to make this topic all about 'you don't like the babes I like' is either delusional or deceptive. What posters are expressing on here runs much deeper than that.

if we knew when management were logging on and they were willing to take part in a Q & A session it would be a start at us giving them feedback and them listening to us BS did one a long time ago didn't they?