| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
DivBZero (Suspended)
|
I cannot make a choice on this poll, because videos make very little difference to me. If you did have video, what resolution is it?
Furthermore - there is no concept of quality here, I'd say a minimum of one quality gallery every 2-3 days would be OK.
From here one has to think of the effort that has gone into the video/gallery. Is this a setup with multiple machines, camera angles and craftmen produced gold encrusted dildos, or is it a girl on a sofa?
Cheers
DivB
|
02-27-08 04:57am
Reply To Message
|
2
|
Davit (0)
|
Div has missed the point. He talks of '2-3 updates a week'. This poll is about the minimum archive you would expect for your 30 bucks, before you even think about updates. I take the point about quality, but that's not the issue here.
I went for '50 complete vids/galleries', and that's as a bare minimum really. These days there are sites out there for $20-$30 with archives going back many years - with literally hundreds of movies/galleries.
Sure, there's a quality issue here also, but that's not what this poll is about. If the quality is bad, then the size of the archive is irrelevant, as you wouldn't be interested anyway.
|
02-27-08 06:20am
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Jay G (Disabled)
|
About $1 a video is my general minimum demand unless it's something very unique or special. I have paid more, but I'm strangely still very reluctant to overspend even though the amount is tiny in my budget. Even though my money situation is much better now, I still have the penny-pinching habits of my younger, leaner (cash-wise) days.
|
02-27-08 06:36am
Reply To Message
|
4
|
Jay G (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #1 - DivBZero :
Good point about resolution. I find myself wanting better & better as time goes by. What satisfied me only a year or two ago now seems "poor quality."
|
02-27-08 06:37am
Reply To Message
|
5
|
Denner (0)
|
Good and serious poll.
This is also what's importend when we (PUs and other users) go for a new site and spend our money:
There are so much shit and crap out there in socalled porn pay-sites that we may be doomed without some sort of consumer-awareness.
Apart from content in general the updates are what its all about.
Again - apart from the content - there are only a few sites that gives us our moneys worth in way of updates and most are in the Top Ten at TBP - allas.
Some sites gives you the stuff - like 1ByDay/1ByNight or Met Art or Twistys. We can discuss the quality on the other hand from now till Kingdom Come.....
|
02-27-08 08:01am
Reply To Message
|
6
|
nygiants03 (0)
|
I say 50 videos and galleries if not more. 30 dollar sites are the price for only top notch sites in my eyes. There are alot of other sites that are around 30, and still stink, but for the most part, the best sites charge top dollar. I would like to say 65 but thats not a choice , o well.
|
02-27-08 08:19am
Reply To Message
|
7
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #1 - DivBZero :
Of course a multitude of considerations are important, but the poll question format itself here does not allow for such expansion.
Besides, as Davit pointed out, it's about quantity on launch. There has to be a focus, you know?
People can say in their replies things such as, "So long as the videos are at least XKps and at least YxZ in dimensions." I know I would. But why ask that poll writers add specifics that the character limits of the poll items will not allow? Take it up with those who decide what those limits are. It ain't me.
I did all I could to make the poll as specific and balanced (pics and videos) as the constraints on the poll submission form allowed.
|
02-27-08 12:54pm
Reply To Message
|
8
|
Davit (0)
|
REPLY TO #7 - Drooler :
You tell 'em Drooler! The fact is, usually before you sign up to a site, its extremely hard - if not impossible - to gauge *quality* as they invariably stick up a load of top notch horny pics and clips on the tour pages to suck you in (if you'll excuse the pun). But that is so often not reflective of the true quality once inside. It may be - it may not.
So we can't really use 'quality' as a criterion when joining - after all, we'd all obviously choose 'top quality' if we could guarantee it. But we can only allow a little faith on that point.
What we *can* gauge objectively is the *quantity* of material available on the sites; that's why this poll is so relevant, IMO. And when you have such sites as Sapphic Erotica, Club Sandy, Pics & Videos, etc. offering hundreds of movies and galleries, one does have raised expectations of what you should get for your buck.
If I could find a fault with this poll, it is that the highest option was '50'. I would have started with '30' and gone up to maybe '100' in my options. But I'm being picky. Good poll.
|
02-27-08 02:55pm
Reply To Message
|
9
|
Goldfish (0)
|
REPLY TO #6 - nygiants03 :
I agree with you nygiants. (Considering I'm a Pats fan that's saying a lot!) For $30 I expect some quality content. 30-50 videos is fine as long as most of them are keepers. Usually I purchase on the side of caution and assume only 10-20% of the videos will be keepers so I went with 50 videos -- though more would be better.
|
02-27-08 03:08pm
Reply To Message
|
10
|
MargulisAZ (Suspended)
|
From my experience almost all new sites seem to start out with 20 or less full episodes of content at launch. Hell, even getting 10+ can be a gift, so while I would love to see 30-50, I really don't think it's likely to happen. People want to start making money, so from a business stand point I guess you just want to launch the site, and save the extra content you may have to give you a buffer on updates.
|
02-27-08 04:23pm
Reply To Message
|
11
|
pat362 (0)
|
I said 30 because that was a good start. Although many sites claim daily updates. Most simply add more pictures and/or videos from the same set. I'd much prefer if websites simply stated that they offered full videos and picture sets weekly.
This way you'd know that for a monthly membership you in fact get 4 total scenes and picture sets.
|
02-27-08 06:31pm
Reply To Message
|
12
|
nadiencendia (0)
|
I would say that the number of updates a week is important: for example, the site Eveangel.com had very few sets when it started, but then it was updated every day, so the archive grew really fast, and the money was really worth it in no time; in contrast, a lot of the new 21st Sextury sites are opened with very few sets, but they are only updated weekly, so you will have to wait for almost a year to be able to access a decent archive of sets.
|
02-28-08 01:18am
Reply To Message
|
13
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #8 - Davit :
Starting with 30 and going from there is raising the bar in the consumer's favor, for sure.
I'm seeing "10" to start with is not exactly popular. I can't imagine why.;) At least that's poll data, too, so the webmasters will see that 10 don't cut it, at least for 30 smackaroonies per moon, daily updates though there'd be.
40 don't seem to cut it, either, for that matter. Some folks just don't ask for too much (30) and others want all they can get (50)!
But if I were on the providing end, starting with 50 might seem a bit like saying, "Here ya go. Just raid the shit out this site and then quit on us." I wonder what the experienced people say, particularly about the ledgers. Khan, are you there?
|
02-28-08 07:25am
Reply To Message
|
14
|
Khan (Suspended)
|
REPLY TO #13 - Drooler :
Haha .. of course I'm here ... I'm *always* here. ;)
Not sure I'm understanding what you're asking with regards to "ledgers". If you have a specific question, I'll try to answer it.
Maybe I can share some of what I've learned about webmasters who launch new sites that may help the users here at least see why all new sites dont automatically go with what you feel they should.
While there's no hard-fast rules (and there's always exceptions), those opening new sites typically fall into one of three groups.
The first is when an existing network is just adding a new site. Often this is in response to requests from their members about a specific niche. There's a good chance they'll have plenty of content when they launch though there's also a good chance some of it will have been seen elsewhere in their network.
The second is an experienced webmaster who sees a niche that he feels has earning potential. They'll have some content for the site but there's a good chance most of it is licensed from a third party content producer (and may have been seen elsewhere). It's unlikely they'll put a whole lot of content into the site until they see if they'll be getting sign-ups to pay for the extra content.
The third is the brand new webmaster. These are usually VERY inexperienced. Often a surfer who decided they wanted to try their hand at running a site. Many just bought a new camera and think they're now content producers. Amateur sites often fall into this group too. This group often will have fresh, original content but the quality might not be consistent. The problem is, they also tend to underestimate how much content they need to launch a site. As MargulisAZ mentioned, they're often in a rush to start seeing some earnings since by now they've spend far more than they originally estimated.
There will likely be a few webmasters in the first two groups who scan the polls (and reviews) here at PornUsers. I doubt many in the third group do.
Contrary to what many surfers may think, producing good content isn't cheap and at the end of the day, most porn sites are businesses so the owners look for a good return on their investment. Giving away a ton of content at the initial launch and following with frequent updates often doesn't seem (to them) like a good business decision.
Hopefully something in there helps you see the question from the other side of the glass.
|
02-28-08 08:23am
Reply To Message
|
15
|
Drooler (Disabled)
|
REPLY TO #14 - Khan :
Thanks, Khan. What I meant by the "ledgers" (as in accounting) was whether or not they're going to make enough money for the site to be viable. I have no idea of the costs, but I assume they could raise eyebrows when the site is high quality and the models are in-demand and expensive to hire.
|
02-28-08 08:43am
Reply To Message
|
16
|
Khan (Suspended)
|
Ahh .. got it. As you rightly guessed and as I touched on, the return on investment is a very real concern of almost all webmasters.
|
02-28-08 08:52am
Reply To Message
|
17
|
Davit (0)
|
REPLY TO #13 - Drooler :
Yeah, but most people (at least I *suspect* most people) quit on sites after a month anyway, as the value is gone temporarily at the end of your first month - whether it started with 30, 40 or 50 vids.
I was with Club Sandy for just one month, and quit with hundreds of vids and galleries under my belt. I'll certainly go back once I've been away for a good 6 months, so I get reasonable value again.
I have made the suggestion before: offer various grades of membership at different prices that offer limited quantities. So if you just need to top up with the last 2 months' updates, you would pay, say, $15, and only have access to the last 60 days (and the next 30). First time joiners who want 4 years of material would pay, say, $50 (obviously the more you purchase, the better the value), then maybe $10 for each month they stick around ($10 buys 30 days of updates, with no backlog, for example).
Just a thought. Might not be logistically easy to implement.
|
02-28-08 01:24pm
Reply To Message
|
18
|
PinkPanther (0)
|
It's rare that I would pay $30/month for a site, and to be perfectly honest, I'm not going to do it unless the site has some special live events with a porn babe that I'm totally in lust with or the site is know to me as having been around for years and having some real depth in their archives. I put 50+ in the poll, but the truth is that I would not be the first in the place unless they were going well beyond that.
For instance, The Black Alley was a site that I was itching to join when they first opened because not only were they providing the material for a new site, but they were announcing that they were going to be providing the archives of Asian4You, a site that had been around for years. I think they were a bit south of $30/month AND they were starting off with a lot of content - that's a site that's going to have me excited.
Some new site that's got just a few galleries and wants to charge $30/month is barking up the wrong tree if they think I'm going to be a customer of theirs.
|
02-28-08 06:13pm
Reply To Message
|
19
|
Pinche Kankun (Disabled)
|
I am going to get greedy here!
I want the 50+!! It takes me 4 hard earned hours of work to accumulate $30 at one of my jobs... Yes I want the gusto!! Every new site should bestow tremendous effort upon its clientes in order to receive their faith, just like businesses like McDonald's, FedEx... Companies that supposedly hustle to meet consumer demands!!
Federal Express wants me to unload at a speed of at least a package every 2 1/2 to 3 seconds!! Porn viewers want vast quantities of complete videos and picture galleries (Assuming there is a video and picture for every model within the website!), with great picture quality and viewable frame sizes (1500 X 1000 resolution with 6000 pixels probably)!! And then... we will want to see our selection of niches and what the content will have for us!! Is there too repetive bullshit or too much editing, does the model look like she takes care of herself? You know, the good stuff!!
So, to possess 50 complete sets of garbage is not wise, especially since some computers possess extremely limit amounts of virtual space!! :)
Peace out
|
02-28-08 11:41pm
Reply To Message
|
20
|
Pornjackker (0)
|
20 sets should be the minimum for $30 and they must contain exclusive content. The exception to this are network sites that launch new sites and already have
a commitment to adding a scene every week. I've never
seen a site launch that has 50 scenes unless the
content is non-exclusive and can be found anywhere.
|
03-09-08 12:46pm
Reply To Message
|
21
|
badandy400 (0)
|
A $30 site better be pretty good sized when it launches. At least 70 GB of porn, or a damn good trial price.
|
03-18-08 11:09pm
Reply To Message
|
22
|
badandy400 (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - Davit :
I would have to say that quality is very important. I know that was not the pole question, but it is out of the bag now so we might as well consider it because it is a valid point. For $30 a month on a new site there better be some great looking stuff. After all they did not have a update deadlines to meet before the site would launch so they should have plenty of time to plan the scenes and get the quality that is becoming standard. A new site should not even consider doing anything that is not shot in HD.
|
03-19-08 09:02pm
Reply To Message
|
23
|
Davit (0)
|
REPLY TO #22 - badandy400 :
Disagree about the HD thing mate. I've had loads of HD downloads that are just plain crap (for all kinds of reasons) but I also have loads of lower res stuff that is mind blowingly good. HD is not the be all and end all.
|
03-24-08 05:25pm
Reply To Message
|
24
|
badandy400 (0)
|
But it can not argued that HD does not have more potential than SD formates. I will admit that I have seen some "HD" junk and some SD beauty. A lot of that would be the type of HD equipment used and the editing after words. If I use a good camera with a large CCD and shoot in SD and edit the video well it will look wonderful, and if I use a low end HD camera that simply crammed more pixels on the same CCD and just post it after it is shot then it will not look as good. There is a difference between High Resolution and High Definition, as well as a difference between me shooting a scene and someone shooting the same scene and actually knows what is going on. Any one can by a HD camera, but no everyone can use it.
Basically, you are right to an extent. I bet those sites that have great SD videos would knock your socks off if they used good HD equipment. All else equal, HD is better. Well, other than the size of the files! :)
|
03-24-08 06:01pm
Reply To Message
|
25
|
Homegirl (Disabled)
|
It should have more than 50 updates for that price.
|
05-27-20 11:46am
Reply To Message
|
