Babestation extortion - Please explain yourselves

carn't say i'm surprised i red somewhere on ere that babestation makes the most money out of all babechannels not sure whether thats just speculation or assumption but if it is true then i can see why by this thread, i would like to thank paul ducky for bringing this to our attention things like this is important that it should made aware of!

i'm not a caller unfortunately did it once for fun thats it's, but i have friends who are regulary callers

(10-01-2011 17:52 )mrichie10 Wrote:  carn't say i'm surprised i red somewhere on ere that babestation makes the most money out of all babechannels not sure whether thats just speculation or assumption but if it is true then i can see why by this thread, i would like to thank paul ducky for bringing this to our attention things like this is important that it should made aware of!

nothing is hidden from the caller, the connection charge is stated in the Terms & Conditions shown on screen.. Mobile callers incur higher charges from operators so it is therefore always preferrable for you to call via a landline if available

Also the video in this thread is NOT a Babestation channel, so should not be in a thread relating to us.

(10-01-2011 18:34 )babestation Wrote:  Also the video in this thread is NOT a Babestation channel, so should not be in a thread relating to us.

I did think very carefully before posting that video, and I should say that I would not have posted it had the channel concerned still been in operation and thus vulnerable to regulatory action. I feel I have been clear enough in stating that the footage comes from a defunct channel, and nowhere is there an implication that the footage was recorded from Babestation. Neither is there any mention of Babestation in my post. I expressly would not wish to see any functioning babe channel in serious trouble with regulators (there's been quite enough of that of late). And this is precisely the reason I made the point about what happened to the mainstream channels, but did so without reference to any operative babeshow. The fact that you, Babestation, have seen the footage and made a point of disassociating yourself from it, suggests that you know how wrong such practices are. So maybe the related issue HannahsPet originally raised (which I notice you didn't address) can now be carefully considered - before more important people than us forum nuts start taking an interest.

I also wanted to say to Weemax that it's pretty conclusive in the (non-Babestation) video that the girls were acting on management instructions and not of their own volition. Weemax's thought about bringing specific girls into the matter shows exactly why such policies are so unfair on them.

(10-01-2011 21:20 )Light Entertainment Wrote:  

(10-01-2011 18:34 )babestation Wrote:  Also the video in this thread is NOT a Babestation channel, so should not be in a thread relating to us.

I did think very carefully before posting that video, and I should say that I would not have posted it had the channel concerned still been in operation and thus vulnerable to regulatory action. I feel I have been clear enough in stating that the footage comes from a defunct channel, and nowhere is there an implication that the footage was recorded from Babestation. Neither is there any mention of Babestation in my post. I expressly would not wish to see any functioning babe channel in serious trouble with regulators (there's been quite enough of that of late). And this is precisely the reason I made the point about what happened to the mainstream channels, but did so without reference to any operative babeshow. The fact that you, Babestation, have seen the footage and made a point of disassociating yourself from it, suggests that you know how wrong such practices are. So maybe the related issue HannahsPet originally raised (which I notice you didn't address) can now be carefully considered - before more important people than us forum nuts start taking an interest.

I also wanted to say to Weemax that it's pretty conclusive in the (non-Babestation) video that the girls were acting on management instructions and not of their own volition. Weemax's thought about bringing specific girls into the matter shows exactly why such policies are so unfair on them.

Well said pal!
You certainly have given food for thought and I hope the guys and girls that do use these very expensive numbers,take some heed from you.
I know these channels need the phone calls coming in to make their revenue,but at the same time I think that they charge too much.

I can still remember when the regulator at the time made a whole lot of these expensive call numbers reduce their fees and if the current state of affairs continue I can see it happening again

noticed Sport XXX charge £4.50 and £2 per minute

(11-01-2011 03:01 )iloveMegan Wrote:  noticed Sport XXX charge £4.50 and £2 per minute

£4.50p per minute No thanks i think i'll pass

(11-01-2011 04:06 )mrichie10 Wrote:  

(11-01-2011 03:01 )iloveMegan Wrote:  noticed Sport XXX charge £4.50 and £2 per minute

£4.50p per minute No thanks i think i'll pass

Reading it back perhaps I didn't make it clear, £4.50 is the connection charge, and it's £2 per minute in addition to that. The small print also states that is for an Orange mobile, goodness knows how much other networks are.

Maybe I shouldn't be posting this here, don't want to give Cellcast any ideas

(10-01-2011 18:34 )babestation Wrote:  [nothing is hidden from the caller, the connection charge is stated in the Terms & Conditions shown on screen.. Mobile callers incur higher charges from operators so it is therefore always preferrable for you to call via a landline if available

I quite agree the charges are known before you make a call in the t & c as displayed onscreen and in the recorded message. My only beef is the over long message-its quite unneccesary to inform about the website and home alone girls. All that bit does is lengthen the message and incur more charges for the caller.
The daft thing is it's not needed because the sooner I get through to the girl onscreen the longer I am likely to stay on the line. BS will still get their money....and I will be happier...and likely to call more often.

This is not extortion by any means it is just one of a few bad working practices that does your company no favours in the eyes of the caller. Good customer service is rewarded with better loyalty and increased business. Perhaps food for thought within the higher echelons of cellcast. Overall I like the show-would not watch it and call otherwise but these apparent, underhand little ploys need to stop please.

That maybe but not sure many callers not myself not for me but whoever calls are reading fine print when the girls are on screen which is in no way is babestation fault, so kinda agree that callers should take responsibilty in reading more carefully about charges in fine print before calling if have done then it is then a choice that has been made to continue to make the call!