I've been meaning to take up Dazzler's posts on page 6 of this thread as a nice lead into areas of the psychology of the spend not yet discussed here. The first of these is how we are influenced by the ease and simplistic practicalities of website use. Mostly, this is the operators using our sense of their sites 'working well' (section 3 in my O.P.) in order to ease and encourage interactions. Essentially, the slicker the site's operation the more likely we are to enjoy the overall experience and return for more.
When looking in detail at this topic we might consider how it begins with the very basics: How much easier it feels to spend by credit card than via cash. Card purchases of all types have been shown to be generally more implusive ones than those made with cash due to a couple of factors. (And what can be more implusive than spends based on the buyer's horniness or physical attraction to what he is 'purchasing'!) Primarily, there's the lack of the pysical action of turning over something of substance to another party. Then other elements come into it if we use a credit card: A credit limit can bestow a sense of wealth we might otherwise might not feel. And the act of actually paying can be staved off. The 'leaving it for another day' is an obvious well known temptation towards spending.
Of course, the shows have always tried to make the process of giving over our cash as painless as they could make it. Ask any old time caller how the habit of picking up the phone was easy because the eventual bill felt remote; placed at some semi-distant point in the future by the perodical nature of the eventual bill. It's the same for most of us these days with our credit card statements; the lines of multiple itemisations are not to be worried about as they are in the future not the exciting NOW! Imagine how much more real and hard fought our spends would be if we were handing over real notes from our wallets for instant despatch to the babes. In reality everything is designed to lessen the sense of value and size behind the figures involved in order to lubricate the flow of lucre.
Then too consider how much easier it is to spend on a streamlined effortless (in theory) website than going to a bricks and morture building. (The utter convience of readily available personal adult interaction is THE huge selling point of the shows; we put aside its virtual nature - less and less of an objection anyway when so much of life is lived virtually these days - because it IS so accessible and simple.)
Finally, on top of all these usual e-commerce 'benefits', there's how much easier it feels to use our site credits once
we've already purchased them. The original intent here is to disguise the pounds and pence invested by refering to them in terms of Monopoly money type tokens as much as possible.* This further distances us from the realities of the situation, the transactional nature of the shows and in particular the act of cash leaving our bank accounts - a lubricating disassociation. Credits are even given an - entirely arbitary - ten times value to make us feel wealthier than we are!
By the time of us clicking to turn over these credits to a particular babe, the shows have already won btw. They already have our money. But to us it feels as if we are still to spend because we love that latter 'business' end of the operation not the initial part.
The fact is, this two fold nature of spending credits on the shows is itself a manipulation; with the operator benefiting at both ends: Giving up our money a bit at a time feels less of a blow than a 'gone in one' transaction. And the healthier credit balance that comes after a top up grants us the illusion that the money is still in our hands. A largely deceptive and powerful sense of control is envoked in the user to boot.
The distancing of monetary transaction and show interaction can thus be seen as another distinct tactic of the channels. It is entirely in the operator and babe's favour to make the two things feel very different to the user. The aim is to make the turning over of credits to a babe feel as free and easy as possible; the credit's relationship to your actual cash clouded and spaced by the processes involved. You're just advising them how to divide up your spends by the end of it after all! (We take it entirely on trust that they will do this correctly btw; even to the point of most of us being unsure of exactly how much of our credits will go to the babe in question.*) Our benefactor largesse of that point (even though, as I've said, the money involved is no longer ours) makes the final divestment to the individual babe incline towards an almost throwaway gesture at times... something we can do as if the amounts involved are not real almost.
Only after multiple interactions are we meant to contemplate that our leverage has now been depleted and a top up is required to continue the rush/fun. (That's assuming you haven't allowed them to make it even more streamlined 'for you' by enabling auto top ups. Or 'mainlining your bank account' as I like to term it!
) When low on credits we crave the return of that sense of control we enjoyed previously and there is only one way to bring that back of course. (Note to operators: The sites miss a trick whenever outdated or poorly thought through tech limits our sense of control
in any way.)
Even when it comes to the interacting itself things like the positioning and colours of the click buttons are thought to be an influence on us. As too, of course, is the peer pressure that can come from the chat box (although that is a different section in my O.P.'s heirachy).
* Tbf, recent changes seem to have brought about more honesty to this aspect. The babes in particular talk of £ figures more than previously was the case. I suspect this is mostly because they are unfamilar or can't be bothered with the o.g. tactic.
Real Ecstasy
Hot & Wet
Live Sex Latinas
Babestation
Search
Member List
Help
/
The Psychology of the Spend
