BabestationX & Live Shows - Chat & Discussion

I purchased last nights show for the first time in quite a while, i was under no illusions as to what it would be like, i didn't expect anything explicit form these girls.
Charlie pretty much performed to my expectations, Tammy fell well short, both girls did show a bit of pussy with Charlie showing the most, for some reason Tammy seemed to be doing as little as possible, she even said on the mic something about not showing her pussy much this time, she had the big knickers on and a lot of the time adopted very tame positions for even free to view TV, at times she sat on her knees side ways on to cam bouncing up and down with her bra and big knickers on Ella Jolie style .
What highlighted Tammy's tamer show was that after the first live show they put on a recording of a previous live show done by Charlie and Tammy were Tammy wore smaller knickers and seemed more up for some pussy flashing .
So all in all Charlie performed to my expectations of her, Tammy for whatever reason seemed tamer than she has been in the past on this channel and fell short of what i expected of her .

(14-06-2013 19:55 )D T Wrote:  No, I know there is cost cutting. I can't be arsed going to find it, but Cellcast said it themselves.

I don't think the cost cutting is of any relevance to which girls are chosen to appear. They were talking about reducing the hours of the live shows which therefore reduces the costs. Since the girls aren't on for as long anymore the shows don't cost as much to put on, although they still do the 4 hour shows on occasions. If a girl is on live for 37 minutes she doesn't get paid what she would for 4 hours, so that's what the cost cutting was all about.

(15-06-2013 12:55 )D T Wrote:  They could have just reduced the hours, on a weekly basis which they have, but still paid the same for hours worked.

I think that's what he meant isn't it? That's what he's saying has happened.

(15-06-2013 12:28 )marlowe Wrote:  

(14-06-2013 19:55 )D T Wrote:  No, I know there is cost cutting. I can't be arsed going to find it, but Cellcast said it themselves.

I don't think the cost cutting is of any relevance to which girls are chosen to appear. They were talking about reducing the hours of the live shows which therefore reduces the costs. Since the girls aren't on for as long anymore the shows don't cost as much to put on, although they still do the 4 hour shows on occasions. If a girl is on live for 37 minutes she doesn't get paid what she would for 4 hours, so that's what the cost cutting was all about.

Cellcast UK the company that owns the various BS channels have said in a report they will be cutting costs in 2013 mainly due to a down turn in overall revenue i believe, no specific details were given by Cellcast UK as to what exactly they would be cutting .

From the tweet posted it does look like they have cut the amount they pay the girls for appearing on BSX, if it's the hourly rate that's been cut or the overall time the girls are on screen the girls still receive less for appearing on BSX, so i should think that some girls could think that it's not worth while appearing on BSX and flashing their bits for what they get paid these day's .

(15-06-2013 12:28 )marlowe Wrote:  I don't think the cost cutting is of any relevance to which girls are chosen to appear.

What I quoted on a previous page clearly says that she has heard the pay has been lowered. It seems to me, that both hours and pay have been reduced. Was there any mention of lower pay before? They could have just reduced the hours, on a weekly basis which they have, but still paid the same for hours worked, but they don't seem to have done just that.

So, reducing an hourly rate for example, isn't cost cutting?

Of course it's relevant. Certain girls choosing not to appear because of lower pay is a consequence.

When that particular girl appeared on this channel all those months ago, she didn't appear for 4 hours, she appeared on the same format that was used last night.

(15-06-2013 09:18 )William H Bonney Wrote:  

(15-06-2013 08:11 )cwpussylover Wrote:  its is caLLED BS XTREME

No it isn't. The last time Xtreme was broadcast was on 25 September last year. These days the channel is called BabestationX.

what does the x stand for then mate???

Think thats for Xtreme CW

(15-06-2013 13:50 )cwpussylover Wrote:  

(15-06-2013 09:18 )William H Bonney Wrote:  

(15-06-2013 08:11 )cwpussylover Wrote:  its is caLLED BS XTREME

No it isn't. The last time Xtreme was broadcast was on 25 September last year. These days the channel is called BabestationX.

what does the x stand for then mate???

It doesn't stand for anything. Its just an X. Because adult films used to be X-rated i guess they want that association in our minds. Or it could be Xplicit. Or Xtra. Or Xtended. Or anything else that starts with Ex!!

yes whatever it stands for..it implies the same as xtreme...over 18 r18...cunt druipping with juice...pink..from spread lips...tea towel holders stretched to allow you to see the dinner it doesnt stand for PG daytime performances or freeto air freeview anyone over 3 can watch

(15-06-2013 14:08 )Fernandez Esperenda Wrote:  Think thats for Xtreme CW

im with you, a jazzed up name change to revamp a dodgy product