Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

(18-03-2012 14:30 )bytor Wrote:  the other channels such as Dirty Wives at best appealing to a smaller and specific audience

But it's an audience no other channel caters to

(18-03-2012 14:41 )iloveMegan Wrote:  

(18-03-2012 14:30 )bytor Wrote:  the other channels such as Dirty Wives at best appealing to a smaller and specific audience

But it's an audience no other channel caters to

and maybe the reason for that is its an audience percieved by the other channels to be too small to cater for? I don't know if that is the case or not??
Perhaps they get a healthier return of calls on these sort of shows than on the more glamour orientated ones. All I do know is they are not to my taste but I might be in a minority.

(18-03-2012 11:58 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(18-03-2012 11:42 )admiral decker Wrote:  Ask yourself this? How many shifts could Babestation offer before they started Dirty Wives and the never ending Babestation Apprentice, and how many shifts can they offer now? Do the arithmetic.

There's a difference between sacking them and just pissing them off enough so they felt they'd be better off elsewhere. For the record Paige didn't have any cut in her shifts before she left and had at least 6 shifts sheduled for March either side of her fortnights holiday.
Your turn to do some arithmetic.

What arithmetic do you want me to do?

It never ceases to surprise me how many people there are who think that Babestation can cut the number of available shifts in half and still keep the same number of girls.

too much twins on bs this week.they dont look happy on the phones to me.they are losin too many girls now,bring back old school babestation,no interruptions, voice overs every 5 mins,osgs coverin screen etc.then i might start watchin bs more frequently

(18-03-2012 20:06 )admiral decker Wrote:  What arithmetic do you want me to do?

It never ceases to surprise me how many people there are who think that Babestation can cut the number of available shifts in half and still keep the same number of girls.

The arithmetic that will tell you, in this case at least, the girl didn't leave because her shifts were cut.

The number of available shifts haven't been cut and, as you're so fond of telling us, they probably have more girls than they've ever had.
If they introduced the new girls in the normal way and mixed them with the remaining old guard we wouldn't have the illusion that the same girls are on night after night, after night.
As I recall, you said yourself you thought they were overdoing the apprentice thing.

(18-03-2012 20:47 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  The arithmetic that will tell you, in this case at least, the girl didn't leave because her shifts were cut.

It's strange isn't it how when Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice started a number of girls all of a sudden left Babestation. But as you claim above their departure could have been a total coincidence couldn't it and nothing to do with the switch to Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice? But you don't explain how those girls could all have been given shifts if they had stayed, given that Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice now take up so much of the airtime.

(18-03-2012 21:21 )7 stars of the orient Wrote:  

(18-03-2012 20:47 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  The arithmetic that will tell you, in this case at least, the girl didn't leave because her shifts were cut.

It's strange isn't it how when Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice started a number of girls all of a sudden left Babestation. But as you claim above their departure could have been a total coincidence couldn't it and nothing to do with the switch to Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice? But you don't explain how those girls could all have been given shifts if they had stayed, given that Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice now take up so much of the airtime.

Of course it wasn't a coincidence. Where exactly did I say that?

(18-03-2012 21:30 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  Of course it wasn't a coincidence. Where exactly did I say that?

So if it wasn't a coincidence, what is your argument then exactly?

Well if you go back to start of the discussion I questioned rodgerthedodgers assertion that they were 'got rid of' rather than left of their own accord whatever the reason was.

(18-03-2012 11:10 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  

(18-03-2012 09:10 )rogerthedoger Wrote:  Lolly was on more last night because she was making bs money ever time i saw her she had a call she worked hard last night she always give 100% performance 100% pure filthy on the phone she 100% makes bs money thats why bs never got rid of her when they got rid of babes you can understand why bs put her on a lot she is bs queen B queen Badcock

So you're saying they were sacked rather than left of their own accord?

Admiral Decker then said it was because there weren't enough shifts to go round after taking on the extra girls, which is obviously true.
I then pointed out Paige didn't have her shifts cut and still felt she'd be better off leaving so it seems as if there are also other reasons the girls are jumping ship at every opportunity.

(18-03-2012 22:30 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  Admiral Decker then said it was because there weren't enough shifts to go round after taking on the extra girls, which is obviously true.
I then pointed out Paige didn't have her shifts cut and still felt she'd be better off leaving so it seems as if there are also other reasons the girls are jumping ship at every opportunity.

So these 'other reasons' just happened to occur immediately after Dirty Wives and Babestation Apprentice started? That might seem like a huge coincidence, but you're arguing that it's not a coincidence?