Studio66 & OnlyFans

(14-10-2018 20:12 )Sm© Wrote:  

(14-10-2018 17:30 )HannahsPet Wrote:  Actually it is a good metaphor for brexit the girls want to be free to make there own deals and not be ruled by Chappers

Corrected your post for you, Jamie is a nobody at STD66 now, and has been for years...

There is a lot of speculation in this thread and it may take time for the dust to settle before we can see what the outcome of all this OnlyFans stuff is. One thing we can settle for a concrete fact though is that Jamie is the sole owner of the Studio 66 companies and that Paul Chaplin has no involvement with them.

The reason we can say this for a concrete fact is that the owners and directors of companies are a matter of public record and the records are very easy to check. In the case of the Studio 66 companies it can be verified in a couple of minutes that Jamie is both the sole shareholder and the sole director.

Bit late to all this, not been here for a few days.

Seems to me someone at S66 took their eye off the ball in letting the babes promote their OF sites while working at the studio. That should've been nailed at the start, not for a 30% though.
Now their trying to bolt the door, not after the horses have bolted but, while they're bolting. It'll be interesting to see if S66 can manage to keep the best fillies in the stable, or if they'll get thrown on their arse and trampled into the shit by the hooves (do I get a prize for stretching that metaphor to the limit? )

S66 have left it too late to enforce 30% on the established babes without severely damaging working relations, to breaking point in some cases.
If they have to get a load of new babes in though, 30% might actually be a good deal for them. If it's a genuine partnership arrangement and not just pimping, i.e. the newbies get to promote their OF on the shows and get the use of S66 photographers to shoot professional looking content.

Having said that, there's only so much 'wanking money' to go around these days and it could be a slow process to lure the punters back if the majority of those already subscribing stick with their favourites for a while.
S66 might come out ahead in the long term, but only if they can survive in the short term first.

looks like some of the girls are gonna fight back.
macy has turned her pervcam into a joke today. 12 fps, 150p, stuttering mess. so im guessing shes 1 of the girls on the off.
coz i cant see any other reason for her turning her cam down other than to put us off using it, so s66 dont make any money off her.

well if thats the case please. dont let the door hit you in the crack on the way out. s66 will be a much nicer place without her by some accounts.

(16-10-2018 13:50 )bigglesworth Wrote:  One thing we can settle for a concrete fact though is that Jamie is the sole owner of the Studio 66 companies

very true mate, but he has very little to do with the running of the channel on the day to day, leaving Ben to run the channel pretty much as he sees fit,

Who is this 'Ben'. Does he have a brother called Bill ?

Since if this 30% slice is his sole idea he really needs to find a flower-pot big enough.

But if he has no ownership he is only the equivalent of a C.E.O. whom the real owner can hire and fire. Maybe he also needs to watch his back.

(16-10-2018 13:51 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  Bit late to all this, not been here for a few days.

Seems to me someone at S66 took their eye off the ball in letting the babes promote their OF sites while working at the studio. That should've been nailed at the start, not for a 30% though.
Now their trying to bolt the door, not after the horses have bolted but, while they're bolting. It'll be interesting to see if S66 can manage to keep the best fillies in the stable, or if they'll get thrown on their arse and trampled into the shit by the hooves (do I get a prize for stretching that metaphor to the limit? )

S66 have left it too late to enforce 30% on the established babes without severely damaging working relations, to breaking point in some cases.
If they have to get a load of new babes in though, 30% might actually be a good deal for them. If it's a genuine partnership arrangement and not just pimping, i.e. the newbies get to promote their OF on the shows and get the use of S66 photographers to shoot professional looking content.

Having said that, there's only so much 'wanking money' to go around these days and it could be a slow process to lure the punters back if the majority of those already subscribing stick with their favourites for a while.
S66 might come out ahead in the long term, but only if they can survive in the short term first.

Bit late, yes, but have summed it up perfectly. S66 took their eyes of the ball with only fans & are trying to bolt the door after their horses are beginning to bolt.

Sure will be interesting to see what happens now as the dust begins to settle on this mess that s66 have got themselves into. Could come out if it well but only after some short term pain depending on who leaves & who s66 bring in to replace them. Especially after the news of 4 established bs babes handing their notice in

Winsaw is spot on, s66 has gone down hill since Jamie essentially handed over the day to day operations of s66 to Ben. Loved all fun antics babes got up to for example a tipsy Cara Brett famously gatecrashing Sophia Knight’s nightshow and going topless for the first time

(16-10-2018 13:50 )bigglesworth Wrote:  In the case of the Studio 66 companies it can be verified in a couple of minutes that Jamie is both the sole shareholder and the sole director.

Well i can't verify it in a couple of minutes that Jamie is now the sole share holder of the S66 companies lol .

The last Share Holder info about 1 of the S66 companies (Primetime Media Group LTD) shows Jamie owning 250 of the shares
The info is in this Companies House records link, it's in he confirmation statement PDF file dated 30/11/2017
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/compa...ng-history

Obviously this shareholder info is from last year, so things may have changed .
I haven't at this point checked any other company record sites, so others may well show more up to date shareholder info that shows Jamie being the 100% shareholder of the S66 companies .

^^ You actually misread that statement.

Jamie has 250 shares. Laura .... has 250 shares. The other 500 shares were cancelled some time previous.

So if that statement is the most up-to-date shareholding - no annual return shown there so I guess one would have to pay to see the most recent ones - then Jamie is a 50% share-holder.

The latest balance sheet is quite interesting. The is a new entry 'Other creditors - long term'. Possibly an outside investment/cash injection. I do have shivers when I see the name 'Laura'. A coincidence ?

(16-10-2018 11:34 )Rammyrascal Wrote:  ^^
couldn’t risk losing Clare, Macy, Mikaela & Cara

If that was true they wouldn't have sent that email out in the first place.

(16-10-2018 11:34 )Rammyrascal Wrote:  ^^
Agre couldn’t risk losing Clare, Macy, Mikaela & Cara

TBH, I would have thought the precise opposite.