StanTheMan
Banned
Posts: 3,790
Joined: May 2009
|
BS's Latest Ploy
I don't know whether to admire BS for their inventiveness or feel insulted that they think all babeshow viewers are as gullable as your average 9-year old.
I'm talking here about their latest ploy; female callers. How come, all of a sudden, every other call the babes receive is from a 'hot female caller'? This has to be the case, of course, otherwise they couldn't make such claims, but what's the betting that if you phoned up to listen in, the female caller would sound strangley familiar? I always wondered what the other babes did on their breaks?
Cynical, you say? Well consider it from a profit point of view; one caller = £1.50 per min. Ten listeners = £15.00 per min
Who cares if the other female caller is another babe presenter, just as long as they're talking filth, you ask? Fair enough, but why not just admit that as being the case?
(This post was last modified: 03-10-2009 21:30 by StanTheMan.)
|
|
03-10-2009 21:28 |
|
StanTheMan
Banned
Posts: 3,790
Joined: May 2009
|
RE: BS's Latest Ploy
(03-10-2009 21:48 )Chilly Wrote: Stan, have you seen Cellcast's latest financial report?
Can't say that I have, Chilly. I honestly had no idea they were struggling. I thought BS was one of the big players?
|
|
03-10-2009 21:54 |
|
Chilly
Posting Machine
Posts: 7,577
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 161
|
RE: BS's Latest Ploy
(03-10-2009 21:54 )StanTheMan Wrote: (03-10-2009 21:48 )Chilly Wrote: Stan, have you seen Cellcast's latest financial report?
Can't say that I have, Chilly. I honestly had no idea they were struggling. I thought BS was one of the big players?
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.ph...#pid233956
(This post was last modified: 03-10-2009 22:00 by Chilly.)
|
|
03-10-2009 21:59 |
|
vostok 1
Twitter Troll
Posts: 1,613
Joined: Nov 2008
|
RE: BS's Latest Ploy
As Albert Einstein once said: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and Babe Station viewers gullibility..."
But you are missing the point Stan, the majority of Babe Show viewers are happy to be deceived where money is concerned, hence the existence of money spinners as "chat with your favourite babe on MSN" and reverse billed text services that never stop. If the viewers were not gullible then these "services" would not exist.
Look at the amount of complaints against these type of money spinners that you can see on the Phone Pay Plus website... You wont find any, because no one complains. Therefore that means that the consumer must be happy with the status quo. And if they are happy then they must be satisfied customers.
|
|
03-10-2009 22:03 |
|
vostok 1
Twitter Troll
Posts: 1,613
Joined: Nov 2008
|
RE: BS's Latest Ploy
(03-10-2009 21:54 )StanTheMan Wrote: Can't say that I have, Chilly. I honestly had no idea they were struggling. I thought BS was one of the big players?
What a company declares as profit and subjects to 60% corporation tax is not the same as what they actually make.
Is this deceitful? No.
Is this illegal? No.
Is this what corporations who turn over millions do? Yes.
|
|
03-10-2009 22:09 |
|
IanG
Senior Poster
Posts: 343
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation: 30
|
RE: BS's Latest Ploy
(03-10-2009 22:03 )vostok 1 Wrote: As Albert Einstein once said: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and Babe Station viewers gullibility..."
But you are missing the point Stan, the majority of Babe Show viewers are happy to be deceived where money is concerned, hence the existence of money spinners as "chat with your favourite babe on MSN" and reverse billed text services that never stop. If the viewers were not gullible then these "services" would not exist.
Look at the amount of complaints against these type of money spinners that you can see on the Phone Pay Plus website... You wont find any, because no one complains. Therefore that means that the consumer must be happy with the status quo. And if they are happy then they must be satisfied customers.
Vostok1, I'm sure you've heard of British porn king, David Sullivan. Well when dear David started out he'd place ads in magazines saying stuff like "Get 100 sexy pictures for £10" - what you got for your £10 was 100 copies of just one picture. Now, next to no one complained to Trading Standards that they'd been ripped off because this is after all fuddy duddy "no sex please" Britain.
I'd argue there are no complaints about these rip-off text services because people are too ashamed to complain about them and, in doing so, let the world know that a) they fell for it and b) that they're subscribing to text and other phone 'sex' services.
No one is ever happy about being ripped-off, are they? Are any of these services remotely value for money? £3.00 for a passport-size photo is bullshit - you can get a magazine full of pictuires of hot naked women for the same price. In fact, you can get an almost endless supply of naked babe pics for nowt on the interweb - I know I do.
No complaints doesn't mean everyone's happy. In fact, the measly profits from such rip-off scams points to the fact people aren't falling for them like Cellcast etc. would perhaps like. I've certainly found no cause to complain about something I've never subscribed to...
A new dittie: The Buggers 2010 (Ofwatch slight return) http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.ph...#pid556229
|
|
08-10-2009 16:47 |
|