Babe Channels - Current & Future Status

The so called "agreement" between Cellcast/Bluebird & girls defecting to join Bluebird for personal or contractual reasons, causing quite an emotive response in other forums, is still a debatable issue as there doesn't seem to be a distinct pattern; as I type this LinseyDawnMackenzie has just finished her stint on BabestationXtra & BluebirdFilms have just released a video of Linsey& Gemma Massey so who does Linsey work for?? Gemma doesn't work for Elite any more..is that because there is no Elite/Bluebird agreement???

(18-05-2010 22:18 )RRROGER Wrote:  Just being a little picky, years ago I used to work for BritishRailways at 3 different locations in GreaterLondon then transferred to Crewe....in total worked at 5 different location for the same company.......

But you only changed location - you never changed company

And in response to BigBen's point in regards to Syco/Epic/Sony. Syco and Epic are independantly operated companies - but it is no secret, nor is it denied that they are owned by a larger company (Sony)

If an act was to leave Syco and sign for Epic it wouldn't be claimed that they are leaving one company to sign for a totally different one - they would simply claim to be leaving one arm of Sony for another.

Therefore, a totally different scenario

Have you ever considered that perhaps it wasn't Bluebird that instigated 'the deal' but perhaps Cellcast, protecting their interests after seeing what happened with Bluebird and Elite?

A business agreement between 2 (entirely seperate) companies in a mutual field is standard business practice - nothing 'suspicious' at all

Why would we even have the term 'business agreement' if the practice didn't exist?

Just to have my tuppence worth here, from reading between the lines, Elite left themselves open to losing girls because they seem to have not had them on contracts.

Maybe Cellcast have their girls on contracts and Bluebird have agreed they won't coerce girls into breaking those contracts? Some girls may still move across of course. Going by one of her previous posts, Caty is, or was, freelance I think, meaning she was free to go where she wanted. Guess there may be others in that position and of course all contracts have an end point.

Could be a reason why there's always tended to be a flurry of movement across channels at certain times of the year.

(19-05-2010 00:56 )Sooky Wrote:  

(18-05-2010 22:18 )RRROGER Wrote:  Just being a little picky, years ago I used to work for BritishRailways at 3 different locations in GreaterLondon then transferred to Crewe....in total worked at 5 different location for the same company.......

But you only changed location - you never changed company

And in response to BigBen's point in regards to Syco/Epic/Sony. Syco and Epic are independantly operated companies - but it is no secret, nor is it denied that they are owned by a larger company (Sony)

If an act was to leave Syco and sign for Epic it wouldn't be claimed that they are leaving one company to sign for a totally different one - they would simply claim to be leaving one arm of Sony for another.

Therefore, a totally different scenario

Have you ever considered that perhaps it wasn't Bluebird that instigated 'the deal' but perhaps Cellcast, protecting their interests after seeing what happened with Bluebird and Elite?

A business agreement between 2 (entirely seperate) companies in a mutual field is standard business practice - nothing 'suspicious' at all

Why would we even have the term 'business agreement' if the practice didn't exist?

I am afraid I have to complete disagree with just about everything you have said. Syco and Epic and totally independent labels from each other. If an act left Syco to go to Epic it would be joining an entirely different company and label. While they are both parent owned by Sony they have no other association with each other. While an act leaving Syco to go to Epic wouldn’t necessarily create controversy (Mainly because most people don’t understand or grasp the concept of parent companies correctly), it would be moving companies. Also business agreements/arrangements are always suspicious and should always be questioned and met with suspicion. Just because two independent companies come to a mutual arrangement, it doesn’t mean that’s all well and good and fair play. Many shady business arrangements and agreements go on that’s how 'vends' are created. The biggest con to the consumer currently been allowed to pass at the moment for example is with vodafone. They brashly advertise unlimited texting for £20 a month yet in the small print you'll find you only get 3000 (Hardly unlimited). Why are they allowed to do this? Because it has been agreed that this falls under 'fair usage policy' and is allowed to pass by bodies such as ofcom (A huge drain on the public purse and an active waste of space). Now activities such as this are been allowed to pass because they are as you would describe 'standard business practice' but it is nonetheless an unscrupulous business practice towards the consumer.

(19-05-2010 19:19 )MARCCE Wrote:  Just to have my tuppence worth here, from reading between the lines, Elite left themselves open to losing girls because they seem to have not had them on contracts.

Maybe Cellcast have their girls on contracts and Bluebird have agreed they won't coerce girls into breaking those contracts? Some girls may still move across of course. Going by one of her previous posts, Caty is, or was, freelance I think, meaning she was free to go where she wanted. Guess there may be others in that position and of course all contracts have an end point.

Could be a reason why there's always tended to be a flurry of movement across channels at certain times of the year.

I suspect this is the reason for cellcast girls moving over to bluebird and people been confused by the agreement yet girls still moving. Id think that not all cellcast girls are contracted specifically to cellcast and are freelance in their activities and thus dont come under the bluebird/cellcast agreement.

To update & cross-reference with posts from other threads, Bluebird, who have admitted an "agreement" with Cellcast, not a coalition, as I theorised, propose to launch in July, comprehensive details of which are detailed in their dedicated thread.
EliteTV after suffering a spate of poachings, either personal or contractual, have recently "recovered" & now have an exciting range of girls to maintain or build on their "market share".
The other main contender, Bangmedia, that I theorised were in coalition with PlayboyTV is still an uncertain entity; to recap they are now running on 7 daytime channels, 4 of which are/were PBTV; running on 4 nighttime channels including 1 former PBTV channel.
Some insight into this situation is now becoming apparent but it's format or scheduling or responsibilities still not clear......."coming soon... 18 and keen,the home of the sluttiest girls on live TV,featuring the hottest teen porn star Megan Coxxx"; promo video shot on BangBabes set. I presume that dual purpose channels SKY901/915/916 will cease to show PBTV content on nights to accommodate; Bangmedia therefore operating 24/7 on 7 channels rather than just on days to try & counter the Bluebird onslaught.

(06-06-2010 18:54 )RRROGER Wrote:  The other main contender, Bangmedia, that I theorised were in coalition with PlayboyTV is still an uncertain entity

Bang Media are not in a 'coalition' with Playboy TV. They have leased airtime from Playboy TV, that's all.

(06-06-2010 20:17 )admin Wrote:  

(06-06-2010 18:54 )RRROGER Wrote:  The other main contender, Bangmedia, that I theorised were in coalition with PlayboyTV is still an uncertain entity

Bang Media are not in a 'coalition' with Playboy TV. They have leased airtime from Playboy TV, that's all.

As stated it is a theory, it still seems very odd that they are running 7 daytime channels, most of the time with no more than 3 live shows,in which case why pay to lease channels if your existing channels are enough or more than enough to cover your needs; to further confuse the issue one of Bangmedia channels, SKY948, from midday tomorrow is shown on EPG as "freeview"?????of what?????
Apologies if I appear to doubt someone of your status & wisdom on this forum but although you are almost certainly correct there are still debatable issues for discussion on the subject....it is a forum!!!!!

(06-06-2010 21:06 )RRROGER Wrote:  there are still debatable issues for discussion on the subject....it is a forum!!!!!

I haven't said you shouldn't debate anything.

(06-06-2010 21:10 )admin Wrote:  

(06-06-2010 21:06 )RRROGER Wrote:  there are still debatable issues for discussion on the subject....it is a forum!!!!!

I haven't said you shouldn't debate anything.

....in which case it would be gratifying if somebody did debate the issue rather than just telling me I'm wrong.........