Call Charges

Do you think the channels are value for money?

Recently Sexstation put up the the call charges to £1.00 from 75p, on occasion i've seen it at £1.50. Is it good value?

I personally wont phone the channels now as it gets to expensive. when sexstation was 75p, i would phone regular. i'm not saying i'm cheap, as i was spending some months £50, £60. now they have increased the price i will no longer call as it get too expensive. (i will save a couple of months and see an escort!)

what do you guys think? should the £1.50 channels charge less? can they charge less? would you pay more?

I would probably end up giving the channels more money if it was 50/75p a minute rather than £1.50.

£1.50 puts me off wanting to call at all - unless I am feeling especially horny! - where as if it was cheaper I am sure I would just get on with doing some calling.

The premiss for you poll is flawed. The question is about supply and demand.

The maximum utilisation of a girls time on chargable calls is 100%. This cannot be exceeded. So even if the calls were 2p a minute you still could not exceed 100%.

If the people who are prepared to pay £1.50 a minute for calls results in more than 50% utilisation of a girls time then there is no point in reducing the price to 75p as you will not be able to make the same amount of money in call revenues even if it results in 100% utilisation of a girls time. This assumes the profit margin on a 75p a minute call is half that of a £1.50 a minute - I suspect it may be less.

Similarly, if you dropped the prices to 75p and added an extra girl, there would still have to be a reasonable rise in demand to make this more profitable when you take into account the overheads associated with "running" a second girl and reduced margins on 75p a minute calls.

In conclusion, as long as enough people are prepared to pay £1.50 a minute, no right minded business is going to even halve their prices.

Please feel free to pick holes in these arguments as I haven't made an in depth study of these things. Apparently, this is not a suitable subject for an OU Business Studies project.

D G x x x

(06-11-2009 18:26 )DGxxx Wrote:  The premiss for you poll is flawed. The question is about supply and demand.

The maximum utilisation of a girls time on chargable calls is 100%. This cannot be exceeded. So even if the calls were 2p a minute you still could not exceed 100%.

If the people who are prepared to pay £1.50 a minute for calls results in more than 50% utilisation of a girls time then there is no point in reducing the price to 75p as you will not be able to make the same amount of money in call revenues even if it results in 100% utilisation of a girls time. This assumes the profit margin on a 75p a minute call is half that of a £1.50 a minute - I suspect it may be less.

Similarly, if you dropped the prices to 75p and added an extra girl, there would still have to be a reasonable rise in demand to make this more profitable when you take into account the overheads associated with "running" a second girl and reduced margins on 75p a minute calls.

In conclusion, as long as enough people are prepared to pay £1.50 a minute, no right minded business is going to even halve their prices.

Please feel free to pick holes in these arguments as I haven't made an in depth study of these things. Apparently, this is not a suitable subject for an OU Business Studies project.

D G x x x

You've not taken into account the number of people who just eavesdrop, this amount could rise significantly.

(06-11-2009 19:22 )thinwhiteduke Wrote:  You've not taken into account the number of people who just eavesdrop, this amount could rise significantly.

You are right but then I've never really understood the attraction of listening to another bloke getting off! I can't even begin to imagine how many eavesdroppers the channels get.

Perhaps I could be enticed to eavesdrop by the babes talking to another lady. The question is, how would you know the babes are talking girl on girl? I mean, it's not like you could put a big flashing message on the screen advertising the fact is it? You have to be pretty desperate to do that.

So, here's an idea. You could pay less to listen in. If nobody pays full price, then there is nothing to listen to.

D G x x x

(06-11-2009 21:32 )DGxxx Wrote:  So, here's an idea. You could pay less to listen in. If nobody pays full price, then there is nothing to listen to.

Or RyanAur pricing.

The first 10 callers get to listen for 10p a minute.
The next 10 are charged 25p a minute.
The next 30 pay 50p a minute.
Then 75p, £1 and finally £1.50

Not sure how to turn number of callers into on-screen excitement, but there has to be a break-even point, and low rates for the first few callers almost guarantees that it is reached, all-night, every-night. A happy owner will turn out happy programs, and invest in sets, costumes, experimental formats, instead of sticking with tired dull but safe routines.

(06-11-2009 18:26 )DGxxx Wrote:  The premiss for you poll is flawed. The question is about supply and demand.

The maximum utilisation of a girls time on chargable calls is 100%. This cannot be exceeded. So even if the calls were 2p a minute you still could not exceed 100%.

If the people who are prepared to pay £1.50 a minute for calls results in more than 50% utilisation of a girls time then there is no point in reducing the price to 75p as you will not be able to make the same amount of money in call revenues even if it results in 100% utilisation of a girls time. This assumes the profit margin on a 75p a minute call is half that of a £1.50 a minute - I suspect it may be less.

Similarly, if you dropped the prices to 75p and added an extra girl, there would still have to be a reasonable rise in demand to make this more profitable when you take into account the overheads associated with "running" a second girl and reduced margins on 75p a minute calls.

In conclusion, as long as enough people are prepared to pay £1.50 a minute, no right minded business is going to even halve their prices.

Please feel free to pick holes in these arguments as I haven't made an in depth study of these things. Apparently, this is not a suitable subject for an OU Business Studies project.

D G x x x

you seem to think i am asking from a business point of view? all i was asking was if fellow calllers are happy to pay the higher rate now. not that long ago it was 50p or 75p, then up to £1.50 with Sexstation the only channel holding onto the 75p.

from a business point of view i understand why they do it. thats not the reason for the poll.

this poll is asking you, the caller weather or nopt you are happy to pay. this is ragardless of any business sense and weather the channels will reduce the cost.

dont try and be clever and point out obvisous business practice when its a very simple question!

Jesus u think thats dear when I first discovered 3g, i ended up with a 300 phone bill!! £1.50 per minute and half the time the advetised hotty wasnt so hot!! So I'd ring 20 girls to find out they were grunters!! Expensive wank eh!!

i personally would pay £2 for some of the girls 50p for others. you just need to find the best. lolly would be a good place to start

(06-11-2009 21:32 )DGxxx Wrote:  Perhaps I could be enticed to eavesdrop by the babes talking to another lady. The question is, how would you know the babes are talking girl on girl? I mean, it's not like you could put a big flashing message on the screen advertising the fact is it? You have to be pretty desperate to do that.

Babestation and the like now do this regularly. The one time I listened in to a girl on girl convo the other girls voice was exceptionally clear so I'm assuming they've started hiring girls for girl-on-girl chat to entice the eavesdroppers which I guess is where the real money is.

In fact, just now Lori is advertised as having 'a couple on her phone'.