OnlyFans

(02-06-2021 17:58 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 15:58 )milfhunteruk Wrote:  I subscribe to a couple of onlyfans it seems to me all the babe channels babes and porn stars want from me is my money they keep DM me with video to buy I talk to then in DM and they keep banging on I am feeling horny lets get naughty and sexting for $35 for half an hour sexting in DM that is dear and they keep trying to sell me custom video for $35 per minute that way to dear its like over £100 for 5 minute video I don't want to pay that they think I am there personal bank where they can get as much money as they like I am sick and tired of it ever time they bang on trying to sell me videos or sexting wanting my money I never reply to there DM I am going to not renew my subscription with any of the babe channel babes or porn stars and close my account I only want to pay my subscription and not pay extra money all the time

To fuck with punctuation, who needs it, really

Punctuation Experts won't be happy with your comment Milf mate

Milfhunteruk may be punctuation-deficient, but he’s not wrong. “Chat to me any time, 24/7” is Onlyfans’ biggest lure, and biggest lie. If you think you’re paying for a meaningful personal connection with the girl you’ve subscribed to, think again - what you’re paying for is in fact the right to start a conversation which the girl will inevitably steer round to how you’ll choose to spend money on her. It’s brilliant, really - you’re paying to put your foot in your own door so the sales pitch can commence.

Make no mistake, chat on OF is always transactional. The punter is just an online counterpart of the bloke in a clip joint who has a girl laughing at his jokes because he’s sprung for an overpriced bottle of nasty champagne.

(04-06-2021 16:54 )BlastedKeith Wrote:  an overpriced bottle of nasty champagne.

I didn't know there was such a thing as nasty champagne.

(04-06-2021 16:54 )BlastedKeith Wrote:  ...what you’re paying for is in fact the right to start a conversation which the girl will inevitably steer round to how you’ll choose to spend money on her. It’s brilliant, really - you’re paying to put your foot in your own door so the sales pitch can commence. ...

^ A most prescient observation.

We might also add this is one of a few things the shows have tried to copy across from the successes of OF: This idea that you can get a guy to pay for access to his own financial funeral with just the vaguest hint that he'll be granted the possibility of 'dying' happy.

Think of...
Tip goals fulfilled behind paywall. A payment to establish a requirement of further payment.
Tip goals to unblur/go web only, etc. A payment to establish different criteria under which further requests for payment can be made.
Tip goals solely designed to enhance the crowd around for an immediately forthcoming paywall session. A payment designed to make the press for future payments more profitable.
BS Encrypted. A payment to access services that seek other payments in the entirely established manner of fta babeshows.

These, and no doubt other recent additions to industry tactics that have passed me by for the moment, seem specifically born from the OF idea that an initial payment can be lured from the desperate male ahead of the real serious selling to come. After all, why have a guy pay once when access itself can be monetised?

Of course everything about babeland has always been transactional. And to an extent any babe-punter communication is intrinsically informed by the former's desire to drive future sales. We can be sure the quest for repeat business is never far from a babe's mind in work hours. However, this quest used to be grounded in attempts to make the punter feel comfortable - loyal to the babe in question and to her channels; since OF though, babe tactics feel like they've become more blatant, blunt, often even mercenary. The hard nose has been revealed along with the hard sell - as the stakes (often the real money for a babe is to be found away from the channels on OF and alike) have gotten higher.

The new competition of recent times is only going to tend to the punter's experience coarsening further in this way - unless he chooses his babes with good care that is...

What at one time could feel cosy, safe, predictable and warm for the punter now oft feels cold and hostile, trepidatious for the unwary, with a deep, deep sense of buyer beware hanging over purchases. This feels down to predominant industry attitude shifting over the last five years or so. And, IMO, OF has played a large part in encouraging that shift.

We can but hope the few babes that buck this trend start to gain more traction inside the industry. I find myself increasingly looking to them to save us from the tedious, life-sapping, babes who think the shows are a mere conduit to camming and OF.

Yes

I think that this is why I tip for my precise directions (requests) to be fulfilled live. Her fidelity to my direction determines whether more tipping and directions follow.

Anyone subscribed to Madeleine Wright Onlyfans, she's the ex female footballer who got sacked and made Onlyfans.

It's an expensive one to subscribe to and she doesn't post much but I wanted to know does she post topless photos.

Did we ever come up with a definitie list of good and bad ones?
I subscribe to (Babe show Connections):
Fernanda Ferarri
Danni King
Stormi Mack

Non Babe show Connections
FrankieBabe (currently free ends 15 June)
Lucy Zara (currently free not sure when it ends)
Rachel Garley

Probably will unsubscribe to the free ones before they end, then re - subscribe once they advertise a free month again. That way i csn take break. There are couple of other free ones as well but will stop those, and may be just keep to the three babeshow ones, plus Rachel's as I like the content, but feel in time maybe many of those will see Fanzworld as being a better platform to use, as it is apparently more UK based and UK priced. I had seen online links pointing towards there being allegations of money laundering going on with OF in Australia but don'tbknow if there s any truth to it or not.

My own worry is, would be whether the VAT hit will be higher if they are UK based but I have a feeling that it may not be the case.

(05-06-2021 02:16 )lovebabes56 Wrote:  My own worry is, would be whether the VAT hit will be higher

It's impossible for VAT to be higher. Consumers in the UK have to pay VAT at the ruling UK rate, whoever or wherever the supplier is.

I've had a bit of a dabble with Onlyfans over the last few weeks. Out of curiosity I subscribed to a couple of MFC models I know. They put some decent stuff on there but it's mostly what I've seen already via WhatsApp/Snapchat etc so I won't be renewing with them.

All the sexting/send me your dick pic nonsense is a bit tedious but the thing that really grinds my gears is absolute nobodies wanting ludicrous amounts for short videos. Why am I ever going to give you my hard earned when the likes of Riley Reid are selling 20 minute fuck vids for $3?

I’m still subbed to Emma C and Penny Lee - great content from both ladies

re-subbed to Nicole Snow (took advantage of a $3 sub sale)

I like Nicole but prices have changed quite a bit since I was last subbed - Jan ‘21 (which is fair enough) must admit though I have said “wtf your having a laugh” to myself on some occasions at what the new prices are for content, i would need a few money trees planted to purchase content now