Sex Webcams


Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What would get you spending online?
Author Message
M-L-L Offline
The Last Hurrah ?
*****

Posts: 10,122
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 117
Post: #21
RE: What would get you spending online?
I am not qualified to comment on the S66"alternative camera/stream" as I've not seen them. But - admittedly not having seen it work in action - speaking personally I'm not sure this particular innovation would encourage me to view/spend more on the channels.

Presumably what is being offered is a slightly less censored/more than they can show on TV free-to-view webstream, as well as a pay-per-minute pervcam ?
It seems to me that this wouldn't really be significantly different to how things are at the moment, yes in theory if not on TV at all they could show more, but will they want to? Will the revenue make it worthwhile ?
Having not seen this in action, I also question whether it would make the "censored" free-to-air TV and webstream views any less static/uninteresting than they have currently become on the free-to-air TV shows : as surely the babe is more likely to spend all their time looking at monitors and making sure they're not giving away what they shouldn't on the free streams/regulated TV feeds.
If it is a hand-held/operated camera, so there is always a camera operator picking the shots and capable of changing position in response to how a phone call might be working, yes that could provide a more responsive and potentially worthwhile service for the those calling in, as an alternative to pervcam; but from the channel's point of view it would still need to be reliable enough that the operator knows not to choose angles which "give away the store" restricted for pay-per-minute angles.
But it seems to me the channels are currently going away from this to having fixed cameras that rarely move, presumably to cut down on the amount of backstage staff required. When the cameras are hand-held these days, this seems to be confined to the "POV lines" which seem to me not as frequently deployed at the moment as they were in the past ?
And, imho, the largely fixed camera, single viewpoint presentations, leading to fairly static babes; combined with anti-freeload attitude, are what are killing the free-to-air shows visually.

It also seems to me that the idea of multiple different cameras on the same babe requires a level of commitment on the part of the viewer to spot when these are in operation and potentially showing something more interesting than the TV feed. Essentially they'd need to actively watch online via the streams for the majority of time, where it is presumably easy to see at a glance which babes have multiple stream options available; rather than watching the mainstream TV.
I think the majority prepared to do this are already seasoned babeshow watchers who have already ditched the TV and generally already watch the shows exclusively online/ through the smartphone/wi-fi device they're using to make the call - if they are calling that is.

For me, the advanatage of the simple directness of the phone-in-to-TV pre-pervcam format was that the babe onscreen played to the one camera - the TV directing all the eye contact and "best moves" in that direction,to assist the illusion of interactivity with the watcher on the phone.
As soon as the babe is having to serve more than one point of view, imho, that kills the illusion of personal contact and the spontaneous changes of position and etc in response to the dialogue taking place on the phone : which was interesting to watch as a TV viewer even if you weren't on the call / listening in.
Which from the channel's point of view is I guess the problem, the show is therefore "too good" for the freeloader who therefore has no incentive to call in.

I'm probably a lost cause as far as the channels are concerned.
I am a "freeloader" who was motivated by a very few particular performers to phone in, and they have all retired or moved into dayshows etc.
But having said that, I WAS motivated to spend money on certain pay-per-view content : bsx liveshows of certain performers, downloadable photosets, downloadable videos of a range of performers, from the channel's websites, from time to time.
I saw this as VFM because you have actual content there you are paying for, that you can revisit/rewatch as desired.
I am less keen on options which only let you stream and not download : I prefer to be able to pick and choose content I want to watch/re-watch; not to have to commit to a long-term monthly-billed subscription service when I might only be tempted by a couple of 5 or 10 minute clips every couple of months, and wholly uninterested in the rest of the content most of the time ( Wink That in my experience has been the problem with the BSX website for most of this past year, the content is all either increasingly recycled/ years old and/or focusing on performers I have no particular interest in).

I just don't personally rate the real-time so-called interactive nature of "pervcam" or webcam shows in the same way. So I am not really the channel's ideal customer. Their USP after all, is the potential interactivity with the babes. I just happen to not be that bothered about that experience, I am content with a more voyeuristic programme - if it's visually interesting enough. And the way things have gone, pre-recorded/edited clips are generally now MORE visually interesting than the liveshows.

So all in all, I am not motivated to spend money on a pay-per-minute basis for pervcam, it just isn't interesting enough to me :
a)it's too static and boring just to have a camera fixated on a genitals only view; and in my limited experience of having used it once or twice the picture quality is also poor.
b)it's also too much of a gamble : there is too much uncertainty in what you may or may not see/ what babes want to/don't want to show / how effective they actually are at serving both the pervcam viewpoint and the TV viewpoint.
c) from what I read about other webcam shows - where there are multiple babes together or similar; these are very hit-and-miss - usually miss - affairs where the babes are singularly reluctant to make any kind of performance without the viewers having to shower them with "tips/credits" etc for variable results; so again to me that just does not seem like it's ever been value for money, for all the 4 years or more that I've been on this forum I've rarely seen positive comments about webcam shows in terms of quality of show/value for money.

I'm not sure that a "third camera", which is not a pervcam, and which can show more than the TV, is the answer for me personally to these issues.
And, more crucially from the operator's point of view - how does a third camera ultimately generate more revenue ?
If the "third camera" is free to view online, but less censored than TV, how does it ultimately generate more cash for the channel to justify its existence ?
I don't see it personally, it will surely just compete with the pervcam - for instance, will the people that used to watch BS Unleashed but never call in to that show and spend money, now watch this "third uncensored camera" for free and start to call in and spend more money than they would if the only way they could see more is - as currently -to shell out for the pervcam option ?
14-01-2018 17:15
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
babelover48 Offline
Teddybear Lover
*****

Posts: 8,962
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 36
Post: #22
RE: What would get you spending online?
Great post and points

What we also have to bear in mind is how much of an influence OFCOM may or may not have in the final implementation

Fern's teddy bear - and will always will be!!
14-01-2018 18:51
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
babelover48 Offline
Teddybear Lover
*****

Posts: 8,962
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 36
Post: #23
RE: What would get you spending online?
Rake completely agree with your post mate.
IMO there so many small things the channels need to do make VIP membership worth the extra cash outlay and one thing that probably won't change is the issue of background noise/music I feel there will always be that issue because I think the music is there to cover sound when the babe is chatting. And if we were to petition the studios en masse we might see change.

The host event has always cropped up in discussions on various threads and again it comes down to getting the babes to agree and the best suitable location.

Fern's teddy bear - and will always will be!!
Yesterday 08:23
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Sex Webcams