|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Solo Model site rant |
| 1-30 of 30 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 07-30-08 03:27pm - 5989 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
troglodite (0)
Suspended Posts: 4 Registered: Apr 09, '07 Location: Huntington, WV |
Solo Model site rant One look at my list of reviewed sites probably gives it away that I'm a fan of solo model sites. With that said, I've been extremely annoyed with the sites I've joined in the last year. Why you might ask? Let me count the reasons: 1) Launching with no content - I've always loved PU because I can see a list of recently released and newly discovered sites. I love finding a brand new model that catches my eye. However, this has also been one of the biggest problems. For some reason, webmasters like to launch these sites with next to no content. I joined a newly released site yesterday (sexystarr.com) with 14 picture sets and 4 videos, 3 of which are from the same shoot and done in horrendous-looking night-vision. If I had paid $5.95 I might be decently happy, but instead I'm out $24.95 for a site I finished downloading in an hour. I joined GNDCali a few days before that. Same situation - 44 picture sets is nice, but a measly count of 4 sub-par videosets ruined it for me. 2) Fizzling out after a month or two - Then there's the site that launches with big plans, a decent amount of content, but stops updating 1-2 months after opening up for memberships. I joined idreamoferica.com about 2 months ago and maybe saw one video update and one picset update in that entire month. The webmaster during that time thankfully saw fit to offer his customers access to all of the sites in the network, but a quick look around showed me that out of the 3-4 solo girl sites he operated, none of them were updating regularly anymore! Not one of those sites had more than 20 short videos either. How long was Trixie Teen's site up before it finished updating? Yes there are exceptions, and I understand a site can only update for as long as its talent will agree to shoot content, but if a webmaster expects me to fork over $25-$35 for a solo model's site, I would hope to at least get a good 50 videos out of it. 3) Misleading tours - Sometimes models can be a master at teasing their members (Callista Model - great example) but other times it's the webmaster doing the teasing. They'll take the most revealing footage they have and stick it in their site tour or preview video in hopes that you'll fall for the trap and join the site. Of course when you ultimately discover that 90% of the site is non-nude, it's too late. Or maybe they'll pull another trick out of their hat and play part of an episode that hasn't been (and may never be) released on the site. I've had that happen several times. Maybe they'll state "I update my site 3 times a week!" and then not update at all (Princess Presley - her site lasted a good month and a half or so!) There's nothing more annoying than dishonesty. If you show me something in the tour, I expect to see it in the site! 4) Interaction - Anyone who is a fan of these sites knows you can always expect to see promises of private member camshows "coming soon". Usually the model claims to be working on getting her hands on a webcam and setting it up to work with her site. Personally I think I could do this in a day with a trip to Walmart or Best Buy! When they do finally happen, the model will do 2-3 shows on camz in front of 8 bazillion people and then never be heard from again. Other models offer a forum or a blog, or maybe an email address, but there's very few that seem to take interaction seriously. That's all I can think of at the moment. Needless to say I've been a little disgusted lately at my experiences. It seems there's very few sites left out there in my genre that really care about the surfer. It's no wonder people download their porn from p2p software. The stuff you pay for is hardly worth it! What do you think? | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 04:28pm - 5989 days | #2 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
The problems rasied in your rant is the main reason I avoid solo model sites. I've addressed a lot of your peeves with other PU members in discussions about websites before. My personal conclusion is that a lot of models think that it'll be a quick and easy way to make some money but quickly learn how consuming it can be (both in terms of time and money if your trying to have a professional as opposed to amateur oriented site). The ones that do it best are associated with other major web sites or have help with their sites and production (I'm thinking the models who took off from 21st sextury and some of the big names in the biz). As for the amateurs, I think too many think they post some stuff and make a ton of money without doing any work. I think some of the amateur sites I've seen are probably the best because they really put a lot into it but this seems to be an exception to the rule. TheRizzo had a thread about a month ago on solo girl sites and the conclusion of most responders was that the best solo sites were pros or amateurs who spend a lot of time promoting their sites. Proof once again that to do it right means treating like a business, not a hobby. Anyway, this is why we have PU. Let others know about the crap out there so we don't have suffer the same fate as you. Edited on Jul 30, 2008, 04:35pm | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 05:59pm - 5988 days | #3 | |
|
NMC2008 (0)
Active User  Posts: 40 Registered: Jul 07, '08 Location: Los Angeles, California |
You want a solo chick who is awesome, I once joined Teen Topanga and it's pretty cool, if you like solo sites then try Topanga. I joined a site called Kayden420 and regret it like 10 minutes later, so be careful of eye catching front pages because once you charge that card they have successfully ripped off another soul. I am not too into solo but I couldn't resist Topanga, Little Lupe is awesome as well, she actually does hardcore as opposed to Topanga, who is solo masturbation and girl on girl. | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 06:22pm - 5988 days | #4 | |
|
troglodite (0)
Suspended Posts: 4 Registered: Apr 09, '07 Location: Huntington, WV |
I've subscribed to Topanga's site several times and actually have reviewed it here :) Her site is another example of one that's no longer updating, and it wasn't updating for all that long either. She never did camshows or interacted in any way with her members - yeah you allegedly got her email address when you signed up, but where's the proof that you're actually talking to her and not a slimy webmaster? Some sites that IMO set great examples - Brooke Skye updated for like 2 years with new scenes in HD every few days and frequent camshows. I dream of finding another site like hers, though it would be hard to match her supreme hotness! Real Peachez was great a while back when I was a member there. Karen Dreams is amazing if you're into the softer side of things. | |
|
||
| 07-30-08 07:03pm - 5988 days | #5 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
When I first started surfing the net looking for some of my favorite pornstars. I discovered that many of them had sites. At least at the time I tought so. It didn't take me long to discover that many of these sites weren't really from the pornstars, but instead some sleazebag webmaster with a drop of leased material. I got burned too many times and since then I almost never join solo sites. I'm sure that there are some honest girls who are deeply involved in their website, and truly care about offering some good exclusive material. I just haven't found one that the girl is appealing enough for me to give it a try. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 12:53am - 5988 days | #6 | |
|
WeeWillyWinky (0)
Active User  Posts: 243 Registered: Jun 03, '07 Location: Havasu City, AZ USA |
I'm a sucker for solo girl sites too, and am usually disappointed. I signed up for Abigail18 only last night, the deal being that you get four or five other sites along with: Jenny Reid, Lovely Anne, and a couple others. I developed a crush on Abigail from the TGPs and finally couldn't resist seeing what her videos had to offer. Two-minute clips of crapola mostly, a good deal of them with awful music playing all through. I fully expected, and actually prefer, softcore; but these vids (so far) are just filler. And most of the great pics make it to the TGPs anyway. I'm going to do a review of Abigail's site. The people there have an astoundingly beautiful girl, are charging a pretty high price, yet don't seem to want to spend much time or money in offering subscribers material that does justice to the model or merits the price of admission. I'd rather purchase one site of very high quality than get six sites of mediocre quality. Same deal at the teenrevenue sites: crappy videos and scant pic-sets of drop-dead gorgeous girls. You know what I hate the most about selfish people? It's that they don't think enough about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!! | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 02:28am - 5988 days | #7 | |
|
jr2375 (0)
Active User Posts: 21 Registered: Jul 23, '08 Location: North America |
See my comments on her site on her review page. It certainly has gone down the toilet. As for Karen Dreams, that is a nice site. The harder stuff, unfortunately, costs extra. | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 02:40am - 5988 days | #8 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
You've started this thread with an on-the-money summary of what is typically wrong with solo model sites. I'd add two more common problems: non-exclusive content (just a collection of stuff from other sites) and no zips of photos (happens too often). There have been a few exceptions, but they've proven the rule that solo sites are to be approached with a strong dose of caution. I think it's even true with the reviews of them. Unless a review spells out specifically the number of videos and photosets, +/- zips, +/- exclusive, and update frequency, I'll tend to be sceptical. While I've stayed away from most of them, I have joined a good handful and the results were generally disappointing. At least I could write a cautionary review here at PU. The exceptions for me have been Evelyn Lory's sites (the official ones, which have been one changing into another over time), Sylvia Saint's (comes with the Evelyn Lory membership, and Sylvia's still a marvel IMHO), Mindy Vega's (but no zips), Sanja Matice's (but the door has closed), and Linda O'Neil's (now long gone). And SexyJaime (Jamie Lynn's site through Penthouse) and Sexy-Cassia (Cassia Riley's) are worth a join since the content does continue to build, about one or two new items per week, and they are nice collections of these very desirable women. Oh, and Rebecca Linares XXX -- with an acceptably low price for a "shortie" membership term, a lot of HC video can be scooped up and played with. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. Edited on Jul 31, 2008, 02:46am | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 07:50am - 5988 days | #9 | |
|
Denner (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,217 Registered: Mar 03, '07 Location: Denmark |
What does "rant" mean - tried to look it up - without luck (that rimes, does'nt it?) Well, guess I'll just come up with this new one: Selina 18 A young latin doll - a little prettier than Lupe, almost as pretty af Erica in idreamoferica.com - and Selina has some hc. One of my favorite solo-sites is Silvia Saint. Both: Silvia Siant in co. with Devils Films and other bonus sites. And: clubsilviasaint.net I prefer the last one. Then the great Crissy Moran. The other day I thought about which pornstar I'd like to spend a night with as numero uno. She might be it. But still think the choise between something like four of her socalled solo site is a mess. Another US-girl (though I'm mostly "into" easteuro girls) is: Naughtyjulie.com. She is good looking and very sexy in fine videos. Anettedawn.com used to be great - it has become stereotype where every new video looks the same. Mature: janet-exposed.com. Very sexy mature girl the quality is not great, though. Candice Cardinele - what a body, what a smile - beautifull, but it's a site from Foxes.com - it certainly lacks something in amount of content and quality. Still to recommend, if you are a fan. "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 10:03am - 5988 days | #10 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
From Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary: Main Entry: rant Pronunciation: \'rant\ Function: verb Etymology: obsolete Dutch ranten, randen Date: 1601 intransitive verb 1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner 2 : to scold vehemently transitive verb : to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 10:12am - 5988 days | #11 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Bombastic - oh how I do love that word :-) "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 10:13am - 5988 days | #12 | |
|
Denner (0)
Active User Posts: 1,217 Registered: Mar 03, '07 Location: Denmark |
Thanks, Khan I get the picture.... "I don't drink anymore - I freeze it, and eat it like a popcicle" | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 01:08pm - 5988 days | #13 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
It's logorrhea in an irritated state. Featured on certain political TV and radio shows in the US. But I really like the use of "rant" as the title of this thread, because it gives it a sense of well-defined purpose. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 07-31-08 09:11pm - 5987 days | #14 | |
|
troglodite (0)
Suspended Posts: 4 Registered: Apr 09, '07 Location: Huntington, WV |
Yikes - I see Brooke's site has gone from golden to garbage. I never needed support thankfully when I was a member, but I could tell during my last membership there that things were coming to an end. She stopped with the updates and started re-releasing content. There were 192+ videos when I was last a member (my brooke collection spans 3 dual-layer DVDs!), but if they're recycling content now, then that stinks! Little April used to be that way, where you could only get about 40 of her 60 sets at any given time. Also - I appreciate some of the suggestions on sites to check out, but that wasn't my goal here really. Basically it was just a rant (apparently a good word for it!) at how some webmasters have become masters of deception. I want to get some content of value when I sign up to a site. Otherwise I'd be trolling the p2p networks for generic porn. I'll do them a favor and not expect every site to provide 100+ gigs of content like you'll get from the giant megasites, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for at least enough content to interest me for longer than an hour! And if a girl isn't gonna show me more than her upper half, then don't make a tour that suggests otherwise! That's the main stuff :) Glad to see I'm not alone in my experiences. All we can do is continue to churn out mediocre marks on the reviews! | |
|
||
| 08-01-08 11:33am - 5987 days | #15 | |
|
jr2375 (0)
Active User Posts: 21 Registered: Jul 23, '08 Location: North America |
I think it's about time that review sites do an updates review on Brooke Skye. Her good reviews on various sites helped make my decision to join. I'm willing to overlook a lot of flaws, but being virtually unable to access the site and being patronized by customer support are not flaws I can accept. A site no longer being updated is bad, but it does happen. Her site has a lot of content, so I could have lived with that. When the site is clearly not being maintained and it's technically falling apart on the server side of things, that cannot be accepted. If you're willing to take my money, you had better be sure that the site is working, regardless of the age of the content. | |
|
||
| 08-01-08 06:59pm - 5986 days | #16 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Hi jr2375 if you take a look at PU's most recent review. You will see that this site did not get a good score and that all the prior ones were in 2007 or before. My rule of thumb is always look at the date of any review. I don't care how good a site was in the past but is it still good. Some sites may no longer be updating but they accumulated such a large amount of content that I overlook that. If a site used to have bad score but now has a good one then I read what improvements were made to justify the new rating, and vice versa if the score went down. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 08-03-08 01:43am - 5985 days | #17 | |
|
jr2375 (0)
Active User Posts: 21 Registered: Jul 23, '08 Location: North America |
That was my mistake. I didn't pay enough attention to the PU reviews, applying to much weight to TBP review. I certainly now pay a lot more attention to customers' reviews, particularly as far as customer service is concerned. I can live with her site not updating, due to the amount of content. I cannot, however, live with having virtually no access and being shrugged of by customer service. | |
|
||
| 08-03-08 03:00am - 5985 days | #18 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
Something I can say from experience is that the TBP review might give you some useful info, but the real dirt more often shows up at PU. I think the TBP is helpful for finding new sites and getting factual info (though that's not flawless, either). For straightforward opinions about sites, PU is the way to go. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 08-03-08 10:19am - 5985 days | #19 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
You are 100% correct about that. I look at TBP for facts on the website, but my next step is to look if someone at Pu has reviewed this site. Unless the price and content really appeal to me. I usually wait until I see a review at PU and then decide whether to join. Another reason for waiting is that unlike TBP's decision to disregard the cost in their reviews, I always factor that in mine. I respect their choice, but for me the cost of a website versus content is important. A website looses points if the cost to content ratio seems unjustified. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 08-04-08 02:16am - 5984 days | #20 | |
|
jr2375 (0)
Active User Posts: 21 Registered: Jul 23, '08 Location: North America |
I would agree with that. I also, however, agree with TBP's decision to disregard cost. It might be difficult to objectively reconcile cost with content in a review. Obviously, some sites are garbage and cost a fortune, and others are the reverse. I take cost and content into account when joining a site. I don't mind paying a premium price for what I really like, but a good price for a slightly poorer site is okay, too, within limits. I tend to be a "collector," looking to make as complete a collection as possible of a site that I've joined. With some sites, that is obviously next to impossible. Some are absolutely huge, and have large daily updates. There's no way to keep up. On the other end, we have sites we could download in five minutes, and then we wonder what we paid for. I certainly will pay better attention to PU reviews, particularly where customer service comes into play. I would suggest that professional reviewers have often been given the kid-gloves experience, while the rest of us get the peasant treatment. | |
|
||
| 08-04-08 05:50am - 5984 days | #21 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I understand the reasons why TBP chose to disregard cost when reviewing websites. I don't always agree with it, but I respect their decision. Solo model sites are a good example of why cost of a website can be important. Having joined a few model sites in the past, and been burned everytime. I wouldn't have been as pissed, If I had spent less than 5$ everytime, but since I spent between 15 and 25$ then that pretty much jaded me to the whole solo model site thing. The sad part in all of this is that many solo model sites don't even belong to the model. Some webmaster owns the name and simply puts leased material. He makes money of the girl and at the same time gives her a bad name. I'm like you in that I don't mind paying a lot for a website or a network, but that's because the content and quality justify the expense. You best bet is to look at the PU review and see who the reviewer is. If you and he share similar taste, then you wil probably agree on the review. I look for certain reviewers who's judgement I respect. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 08-06-08 06:52pm - 5981 days | #22 | |
|
PinkPanther (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,136 Registered: Jan 08, '07 Location: Oakland, CA |
The problem with Solo Model sites is that they're solo model sites. So it's a matter of the person that put the site together giving a damn for the consumers in the first place as well as a matter of that person getting along with the model over a protracted period of time AND the model remaining interested in working on the site. There are a lot of guys putting together these sites who just hire some attractive girl to shoot a certain amount of content that they then dole out and the girl was gone before the site was even launched. I'm pretty sure that's the way that the people that did Teen Topanga, Teen Trixie, etc operate. There are forums where you can read these guys discuss how much content you need in order to launch and how much to pay the girls, etc. It's interesting if you're a fan of these sites to get a glimpse behind the curtains. Then there's the matter of the model getting along with the guys (or girls) producing the sites. Phil Flash got bored and fired most of his models, including the ones that were most professional (Princess Blueyez & Seanna Teen). Sandy Summers decided that she didn't want to work with a couple of teams of web site characters before she started her newest site SandySummers.com herself with a former member of her last site. Then there's a matter of the models staying interested. Part of what burned Phil Flash out, I believe, was models flaking on him - cancelling shoots at the last minute that he had prepared for and paid for (or put off other models for) or walking away from sites that he put together for them after a few months. Seanna got a whole new site up and going with another company then walked away after a few months. Raven Riley really pissed off the guys that she worked with when she recently quit. They thought she was the gift that was going to keep giving for years and she could have been. She was doing personal appearances, she was doing frequent cam shows, she was doing hard core shit, she was a solo girl webmaster's dream - then she decided to quit and now they just have their stash of un-released shit to last a while. With all that said, though, I still like good solo girl sites. Sandy Summers runs a good one with updates almost every day, including a lot of FTV Girls content as well as hot girl/girl stuff and frequent cam shows. The people who do Katie Fey.com, Andi Pink.com, etc are real pros even though lots of their sites are running on stashed material, not new. If you like hot Latinas, Karla Spice's site is a great deal right now because they are giving away membership of 6 other sites as bonuses - it's a whole lot of Latinas for a decent price, which makes it perhaps the best Latina tease deal around - in solo girl sites or otherwise. | |
|
||
| 01-06-09 06:15am - 5829 days | #23 | |
|
ramscrota (0)
Suspended  Posts: 54 Registered: Jul 04, '07 Location: Geelong Vic Australia |
I like the concept of a solo model site - such as the focus on a particular model as she develops, etc - the whole sense of building up a relationship with her. That said, I've been a member of a numbor of such sites, and I've yet to find one that was any good. They seem to ignore most porn basics - such as the need for easy navigation, good quality pic & vid sets; model presenting a vivacious persona, etc. I was on one recently in which the model was attractive, the pics sets were reasonably well done, but the model never smiled, and looked bored most of the time. How she could expect to gain a following with such a sour-puss attitude is beyond me. | |
|
||
| 01-08-09 03:51am - 5827 days | #24 | |
|
picdude (0)
Active User Posts: 107 Registered: Dec 26, '08 Location: Italy |
Solo model sites rile me, I mean how difficult is it to do a daily blog update or even a weekly blog update for your paying fans! To be honest apart from the technical skills of setting up the website I truly find it difficult to understand how these girls can't update it regularly. An hour a night to respond to some emails, post some messages in your forum and update your blog is all it would take to keep your site fresh and even without extra content people would overlook it too an extent if they are around. | |
|
||
| 08-23-09 12:49am - 5600 days | #25 | |
|
nofrigginidea (0)
Active User Posts: 1 Registered: Aug 23, '09 |
I agree, solo model sites are sometimes a pain... Recently I joined DaddysKitty.net ... I gotta say its one of the best solo model sites I've ever joined.. the videos simply kick ass and they update often.. thumbs up | |
|
||
| 08-24-09 04:50am - 5599 days | #26 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
Quick followup ... This site has now been listed. You can enter your remarks at: https://www.pornusers.com/review/daddyskitty/ So, it looks like you created an account here just to post this promotion. We hope you'll consider adding a review of the site, Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson Edited on Aug 24, 2009, 06:18am | |
|
||
| 08-24-09 05:34am - 5599 days | #27 | |
|
james4096 (0)
Suspended Posts: 132 Registered: Mar 02, '09 |
LOL. I was going to say something, about that guy. Diggin up an 8 month old thread. Maybe we'll see a review and score of 100 for this one. That was nice of of you Khan to list his site after he did that. | |
|
||
| 08-24-09 06:20am - 5599 days | #28 | |
|
Khan (0)
Suspended Posts: 1,737 Registered: Jan 05, '07 Location: USA |
Yeah, we try to list all eligible pay sites ... even if they come to our attention by suspicious means. ;) Kind of a good fit with today's poll question, huh? https://www.pornusers.com/replies_view.html?id=37450 Former PornUsers Senior Administrator Now at: MyPorn.com "To get your ideas across use small words, big ideas, and short sentences."-John Henry Patterson | |
|
||
| 08-24-09 11:38am - 5599 days | #29 | |
|
james4096 (0)
Suspended Posts: 132 Registered: Mar 02, '09 |
Quite a coincidence. | |
|
||
| 08-24-09 06:59pm - 5598 days | #30 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Maybe this is the first solo model site he has ever joined and therefore by default it is the best. Oops monkeys just flew out of my ass. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 1-30 of 30 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
