New channel launch

(19-01-2015 19:04 )BarrieBF Wrote:  

(19-01-2015 18:07 )Goodfella3041 Wrote:  even the producers at Babestation are capable of working out the difference between "total callers" and "callers per minute".

Yes it's a basic misunderstanding on the part of biggles. He's not the first to make that mistake. In fact if he watched Babestation more carefully he could see for himself how it works.

For the record, each girl is required to be logged in to the phone system before she can take calls, the system therefore recording the exact time she's been logged in and what call minutes were achieved for that time.

It never ceases to amaze me that there are always people around like biggles who think that Babestation wouldn't have this information, despite the girls often being seen on screen waiting for their phones to be logged in.

This one keeps coming round, yet the truth is no one really knows how this all works, unless you're a producer on one of these shows. I'm assuming (unless told otherwise) that none of the "experts" who write in explaining how these call stats work does actually work on the shows, and therefore knows any better than the people who say things like "Lori is always waving the phone and doesn't seem to get many calls". I'd say that (in the absence of any real evidence either way) that everybody's view on here is equally (in)valid.

(19-01-2015 21:20 )SteveHG Wrote:  the truth is no one really knows how this all works, unless you're a producer on one of these shows.

I'm afraid your truth isn't the truth.

I'm not a producer on one of these shows, but I've visited channels and been shown how call logging software works.

It would be impossible for the channels not to have such systems, because girls are typically given targets for call minutes that they are expected to reach, and without having call logging in place how would anyone know if the targets were being met?

(19-01-2015 21:20 )SteveHG Wrote:  I'd say that (in the absence of any real evidence either way) that everybody's view on here is equally (in)valid.

I don't claim to be an "expert" about any of this stuff or to have any inside information. It is all just speculation. But I do think that some assumptions are more logical and make more commercial sense than others.

None of us were around in 2000 BC and nobody knows why Stonehenge was built. But that doesn't mean that a defensible theory about an astronomical function should be considered just as (in)valid as the idea that it was once a stable for unicorns.

^ Of course it was neither - it was a pen for dinosaurs being taken to market - I'm sure it was in that Raquel Welch drama-documentary about the pre-historic olden days ?

not another babestation channel,
there's enough ugly models as it is on babestation

(19-01-2015 22:00 )Goodfella3041 Wrote:  

(19-01-2015 21:20 )SteveHG Wrote:  I'd say that (in the absence of any real evidence either way) that everybody's view on here is equally (in)valid.

I don't claim to be an "expert" about any of this stuff or to have any inside information. It is all just speculation. But I do think that some assumptions are more logical and make more commercial sense than others.

None of us were around in 2000 BC and nobody knows why Stonehenge was built. But that doesn't mean that a defensible theory about an astronomical function should be considered just as (in)valid as the idea that it was once a stable for unicorns.

The real flaw in all this argument is that presupposes BS (and other channels for that matter) always make sensible, hard-nosed decisions based on sound commercial principles. But that doesn't explain why they've got rid of so many excellent girls (leave space for people to name their favourites) over the years, taken on so many crap "one hit wonders" only to get rid of them after one or two shows, and kept the dire BSX format going (surely that can't make any money?) for so long. Those are just some of the not-so-great commercial decisions that spring to mind, I'm sure others can think of more.

(19-01-2015 05:25 )archibald cockfoster Wrote:  Is it a reality TV show by any chance, set in that 'Babestation house' they have in Milton Keynes?

(19-01-2015 15:34 )mrmann Wrote:  The house would make for a great setting for an actual channel, if they could figure out how to set the equipment up and broadcast from there! Wouldn't be worth the effort though, but it would still be a blast to watch the women as they perform in an actual mansion! We could have backyard garden sessions, sessions in multiple rooms/bathrooms, kitchen sessions, sessions in front of a fire place etc.

I like to dream

I actually favour this idea more than any other, back in 2008 we had a channel called Ape TV and it ran a BB Style house for potential models. You could phone in aswell as watch the coverage most of the day and night between them all.

I'd love to see this type of show resurrected as the usual format to a babe show is just becoming old hat now, we desperately need something different. Call it The Apprentice wannabe Babestation Babe meets Big Brother.

One show I most definitely do not want to see is Asian Babes. Chicks with dicks, no thanks.........

(19-01-2015 22:34 )SteveHG Wrote:  The real flaw in all this argument is that presupposes BS (and other channels for that matter) always make sensible, hard-nosed decisions based on sound commercial principles.

It only presupposes that profit is the ultimate driver of all their decisions and that it is through that prism that one has to interpret everything that they see on screen.

It certainly does not presuppose that they always (or even mostly) make the right decisions.

(I also love the Big Brother Babeshow format, btw!)

(19-01-2015 22:34 )SteveHG Wrote:  The real flaw in all this argument is that presupposes BS (and other channels for that matter) always make sensible, hard-nosed decisions based on sound commercial principles.

Babestation is clearly more "hard-nosed" than most businesses, going by the way they try and squeeze as much money out of customers as is possible. For example, look at the supposedly hardcore shows on BSX they keep advertising. But as Goodfella pointed out whether the reasoning behind their decisions is sensible or sound is a different argument altogther.

(19-01-2015 22:16 )wullie2800 Wrote:  not another babestation channel,

It's probably worth reminding people that Sky channel 945 is a Babestation channel already. This point has been a bit overlooked.