Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

(17-01-2012 11:36 )babestation Wrote:  Apologies for the random psychic show appearing on Babestation, how long was it like that for?

I am making sure our night staff check for these problems and get them resolved as soon as possible from today onwards.

Surely the staff on the Psychic show should have been aware of this before it happened.

(17-01-2012 10:09 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  bs probably realized that the shows was not going well so they bring on one of their top babes Lolly Badcock to see if she can make the shows any better why is that ridiculous

Because all bs babes each night should get equal screentime on the channels not just some

Yeah the psychic channel should have seen it coming hope Louise if she's on tonight gets more time on tv (she usually does back to back nights)

(16-01-2012 23:08 )quiquems Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 12:12 )mrwotzup Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 11:36 )babestation Wrote:  Apologies for the random psychic show appearing on Babestation, how long was it like that for?

I am making sure our night staff check for these problems and get them resolved as soon as possible from today onwards.

Surely the staff on the Psychic show should have been aware of this before it happened.

It was all those thoughts of randy men suddenly flowing through her head that clouded her judgement.

Just look at the pic. She looks really stressed out, as if she's suddenly saying "Get out of my head you dirty buggers"

(17-01-2012 12:27 )Rammyrascal Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 10:09 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  bs probably realized that the shows was not going well so they bring on one of their top babes Lolly Badcock to see if she can make the shows any better why is that ridiculous

Because all bs babes each night should get equal screentime on the channels not just some

Yeah the psychic channel should have seen it coming hope Louise if shs's on tonight gets more time on tv (she usually does back to back nights)

Lolly Badcock. Top Babe. why, oh why, oh why

Sorry to say guys & gals BS is the least inviting channel on Sky as far as I am concerned.

Only Ella brightens up my day on BS and this is bearing in mind she does not go naked. Lolly and the old brigade seem to rule the channel, albeit there have been new faces on there recently, they are no longer in RCL league, who have a gr8 variety of ladies and far more interesting sets.

Until the return of Stevie Lou and Candy Sexton (which appears to be a no-hoper), I will only watch Ella or any new babe such as young Sasha that comes along.

(17-01-2012 10:09 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  bs probably realized that the shows was not going well so they bring on one of their top babes Lolly Badcock to see if she can make the shows any better why is that ridiculous

How do girls establish themselves when they don't even get equal screentime, or solo screentime? (As previously stated) When you limit it to a few girls you tend to find you only notice them and not bother hanging around waiting for the ones that are supposed to be on to make a quick cameo.

You need to cater to everyone, not a certain few.

i dont rate bs very highly nowadays, they used to be good shows to watch a few years back, but sadly they arent worth watchin anymore for various reasons, ie too many interruptions from voice overs when youre on a call or not,osg,same babes takin all air time,as for bsx that is a waste of money to me.too many soft porn films and not enough action live with different babes everynight.too much of the same solo sex shows

(17-01-2012 15:00 )ExtremelyCritical Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 10:09 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  bs probably realized that the shows was not going well so they bring on one of their top babes Lolly Badcock to see if she can make the shows any better why is that ridiculous

How do girls establish themselves when they don't even get equal screentime, or solo screentime? (As previously stated) When you limit it to a few girls you tend to find you only notice them and not bother hanging around waiting for the ones that are supposed to be on to make a quick cameo.

You need to cater to everyone, not a certain few.

It is on the girls to prove themselves - they have to make the most of whatever opportunities they are given. It may not be fair or easy but they are in quite a competitive industry and they have to impress their bosses. Established girls such as Lolly and Lori could rest on their laurels and not keep pushing so hard but they do and in my experience are the best to watch/talk to. The other girls who want those slots have to meet those standards but so few of them do so. If Lolly or Lori were just starting out and getting the crappy slots I guarantee that they would work those slots better than 90% of the other girls and within 6 months we would be back to where we are now.

(17-01-2012 15:26 )rj242 Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 15:00 )ExtremelyCritical Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 10:09 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  bs probably realized that the shows was not going well so they bring on one of their top babes Lolly Badcock to see if she can make the shows any better why is that ridiculous

How do girls establish themselves when they don't even get equal screentime, or solo screentime? (As previously stated) When you limit it to a few girls you tend to find you only notice them and not bother hanging around waiting for the ones that are supposed to be on to make a quick cameo.

You need to cater to everyone, not a certain few.

It is on the girls to prove themselves - they have to make the most of whatever opportunities they are given. It may not be fair or easy but they are in quite a competitive industry and they have to impress their bosses. Established girls such as Lolly and Lori could rest on their laurels and not keep pushing so hard but they do and in my experience are the best to watch/talk to. The other girls who want those slots have to meet those standards but so few of them do so. If Lolly or Lori were just starting out and getting the crappy slots I guarantee that they would work those slots better than 90% of the other girls and within 6 months we would be back to where we are now.

While If Girl A performs much better than Girl B,C & D thus making Girl A have more screentime than them that's fine like you say it's up to the Girl B to up her performance to get as much screentime as Girl A, that is not what is happening here.

What we have is Girl A on the bed for hours on end like some sort of 24/7 Show based around said person while Girl B doesn't get enough time to impress within the limit Girl A gets, then if that wasn't enough Girl B has to share a bed with Girl C and Girl D in Babestation's magnificent attempt to make more £££ and perhaps make sure the girl's don't fall into obscurity.

My point there is how is it fair Girl A get a solo stint for hours repeatedly while the rest will be lucky to even get 30mins once, thus having to share the same bed so they can't even do the things Girl A can do as she is by herself.

Also like I said you're not catering to everyone, each has there own preference, it's incredibly tedious watching the same girl over and over with not a great choice to choose (BabeStation have alot of girls too, mind you)

If I see Lolly on the screens and change the channel then come back an 1hour and some time later and STILL see Lolly there, I'm afraid to say there are issues mate.

(17-01-2012 15:38 )ExtremelyCritical Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 15:26 )rj242 Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 15:00 )ExtremelyCritical Wrote:  

(17-01-2012 10:09 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  snip

snip

snip

snip

The point still stands. You only get 30 mins solo? - deal with it and put on the best 30 min performance possible. Stuck on a bed with 2 other girls and 6 inches of space - be better than the other 2 and prove you deserve more. So many girls put on lazy uninspired performances and then people wonder why they don't advance up the pecking order.
I don't think for a minute that what I said is easy to do but if a girl wants more screentime then it is on her to prove that she deserves it. If she thinks that she is being unfairly treated, then she needs to consider moving channels.