Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion

Why couldn't I get the bloody webstream

(10-10-2017 17:40 )ryuken Wrote:  Recent technical issues will hopefully lead to all the channels providing web-only content on a similar level to what Rebecca More and Lola Knight put on show last night for S66.

It's the exact type of show that everyone on here has been screaming for them to make for years.

If the channels continue to ignore our opinions, and hide shows behind curtains, squeeze two presenters onto cramped sets or create magazines then I hope they all go bankrupt.

But what do I know, I'm just a "freeloader" that doesn't want to pay for watered down OFCOM rubbish and would prefer to spend it on awesome topless days, fully nude nights and 2-4-1 shows that have good sound and picture quality.

If I was in charge then I'd have one webstream where the day babes could each go on for a few hours during their shifts. I would make it password protected so you would just text in and get an individual password per day to access it for a couple of quid charge to attract more people and make it easier and fairer then paying for pervcam. Most probably make more money this way anyhow and the more adventurous girls would earn more money due to more people watching them. You could also do specials with two girls together getting it on for a bit extra. To me this sounds really easy to set up.

Any thoughts?

(14-10-2017 17:41 )Unscarreduk Wrote:  If I was in charge then I'd have one webstream where the day babes could each go on for a few hours during their shifts. I would make it password protected so you would just text in and get an individual password per day to access it for a couple of quid charge to attract more people and make it easier and fairer then paying for pervcam. Most probably make more money this way anyhow and the more adventurous girls would earn more money due to more people watching them. You could also do specials with two girls together getting it on for a bit extra. To me this sounds really easy to set up.

Any thoughts?

Great post.

If I ran a channel the first thing I'd do engage with fans as much as possible and find out what they're willing to pay for.

I'd also hire a roster of presenters that don't all look the same, so I could cater for all tastes during every shift.

With the changes in technology since the channels were created, I'd also look at increasing the production values of the shows.

The camera, stream, lighting and sound quality shouldn't be as poor as it is for the amount we pay to call and watch.

I'd scrap monthly website membership fees for exclusive videos and pictures and just make them all individually available to purchase for £5.

Getting rid of pervecam, 2 minute challenges, magazines and curtain shows would be a must too.

I'd replace them with hour long web-only shows that you could pay to see live or buy later as a download for £5.

They're competing with websites that either offer similar content for free and/or at a higher quality of production value.

So I'd look at creating avenues that avoid OFCOM's restrictions too.

The channels and presenters need to better understand and show more respect their customers or they will end up being unemployed.

There are so many great innovations that are posted on here by people way more intelligent than me.

Producers and hosts should be looking to implement them onto their shows.

I know they all see what is written on here because the presenters all spit their dummy out when it's negative.

So please could you give us just as much credit when it's positive.

Or it'll mean no more champagne in fancy restaurants, holidays to Ibiza or parties in west end clubs.

(14-10-2017 19:08 )ryuken Wrote:  I'd scrap monthly website membership fees for exclusive videos and pictures and just make them all individually available to purchase for £5.

I'd replace them with hour long web-only shows that you could pay to see live or buy later as a download for £5.

They're competing with websites that either offer similar content for free and/or at a higher quality of production value.

Folks are notoriously cash-conscious when it comes to this kind of content ?
£5 for individual videos/photos seems like potentially poor value ? Needs to be measured against what content is available for a monthly fee ?
Depends on frequency of new content/quantity of individual photosets & frequency/length/quantity & quality of video clips ?
For instance, PRP (the soft-porn Men Only / Mayfair / Club magazines website) charges £4.30 for electronic copies of individual magazines and £4.00 for photosets of 50 images of selected babe, bear in mind that not every single picture in a photoset will be "fully nude",there will generally be a fair proportion which are clothed/semi-clothed.

With the amount of twitter and instagram followers even the, let's say, averagly popular girl has (tens if not hundreds of thousands), I find it strange they haven't tried to monetize it. For example I went on Cara Steels twitter for any updates on how she is and she has 93000 followers. That's a hell of a lot of potential customers for her and s66.

S66 has under 5000 subscribers on their youtube channel. That's a joke really considering the amount of money that could be generated. Just advertising on their twitter pages and every vid would be in the hundreds of thousands. There are Anastasia harris vids other people have put up that have got 300000. I would even branch out into the asmr market particularly massage videos as these get millions of views (see asmr barber on youtube). This would get people subscribing in droves and in turn drive traffic into the s66 website and who wouldn't want to see Anastasia or Evelyn get an all over massage .

^
Great point M-L-L about the value for money.

For $20 per month BS offer:
•200 BabeCall Credits (worth £20) to spend on PervCam, Calls and Girls At Home
•Unlimited access to the Babestation.tv exclusive Members Area (worth £19.95)
•100,000+ exclusive photos of your favourite Babes - both current and previous
•1,000+ exclusive videos of your favourite Babes going further than ever before
•Watch our pay-per-view BSX TV show for FREE - streaming live each night (worth over £150)
•GOLD username in chat for extra recognition from the Babes

For £19.99 per month S66 offer:
•200 VueCall Credits (worth £20) a month to spend on calls and cams
•Exclusive Photo Galleries
•1,325 Videos (many in HD)
•XXX Content
•Unrestricted Favourites

Personally neither of those deals appeal to me but I can see how a "GOLD username in chat for extra recognition from the babes" might be appealing to some people LOL.

That's a good point you raise about PRP's site. Since September this year they're now selling downloadable videos of Lindsey Dawn McKenzie, Brooke Little, Beth Bennett and Tiffany James for as little as $3.99 that last between 5 to 20 minutes.

Maybe the future for the channels is to create high quality cam shows with great production values, a VOD service for live, pre-recorded and custom videos and maybe a signed poster service like Fernanda Ferrari does on her personal website.

I'm tired of contempt the channels have for us as customers. So I'm not going to pay for it anymore.

(14-10-2017 22:00 )ryuken Wrote:  ^
Great point M-L-L about the value for money.

Personally neither of those deals appeal to me but I can see how a "GOLD username in chat for extra recognition from the babes" might be appealing to some people LOL.

Well in the interests of balance and at the risk of being labelled an apologist for the channels, I would say I was a member of the BS site for some months a couple of years ago, well before the Babecall credits and pervcam boom, and - for me - I'd say there was fair amount of photo and video content going back some years and including some performers no longer regularly on the channels at that time, all downloadable, and all that I appreciated, and was VFM as far I was concerned for the limited time I was a member.
This varied from "glamour" type photos and clips of daytime performers to more explicit clips from the more "pornstar" types, and included some overlap with bsx (recorded liveshows etc), and there was a reasonably steady drip feed of new content each week.

What it's like nowadays I don't know - personally I wouldn't use the Babecall credits etc nowadays, so I wouldn't see that as an incentive to sign up, but others might.

bit of a mixed bag tonight...

not entirely sure the game babestation is trying to play, or who they think there playing against. but they seem to be in a 1 horse race to the bottom at the moment.
in the last 8 months or so i have seen them tighten the noose on there pervcam, and start over selling cam shows that the girls are just unwilling to do, at any price!.
as a result there are a lot of unhappy customers that arnt returning to use the services or if they do its to a much lesser degree.
add in the recent decision to cancel unleashed in favour of shadow shows and blurred feeds in the hope that the freeview web callers will start paying to watch the cams. im left wondering whos actually in charge. and what they think they are trying to do, as it doesnt seem to make any sense if there looking to make money from this business.
it seems the girls are able to set there own prices and there being utterly unrealistic in there idea of what the customer is willing or able to eat cost wise. (really £6-10 a minute?, sorry but i find it hard to justify £1.50 for what some of them are doing)

then we have the other side of the coin

s66 seem to have decided to increase access to there content, by sticking a second cam on for stream 1 and an OSG channel on a 3rd stream. simple and cost effective from what i can see. as this allows web users to take advantage of the alternate call methods that are only generally viewable to the tv audience that are not mentioned on there website.
i cant fault this at all. they have a smaller operation but they are maximising its potential.

so yeah we do seem to have 2 players taking completely different approaches to the same problem of making money.

i can see s66's potential and if it works i dont see any reason (assuming its cost effective) to expand this experiment across the rest of there channels.
props for at least trying something different

while i see SS babestation doing its best to impersonate the titanic with no 1 on deck willing to admit there's an iceberg ahead.
(sorry i couldnt think of a better analogy to the sinking ship that is babestations profit margin )

^^ It would be relatively simple and cost effective you'd think to set up two subscription rates - one with cam/call minutes and one without. The latter for those without interest in the cams. The demand for such a thing maybe small but doesn't it have virtually no overheads to it? And you'd think the operators would want every single person they could get on using their sites. They might even convert a stubborn hold out or two just by having them around the place.

Their singlemindedness towards the cams atm seems myopic in some regards.

^^ Could not agree more with Hex!t