Comment Replies (4)
|
Replies to the user comment above. |
| Msg # |
User |
Message |
Date |
1
|
Monahan (0)
|
It's shit like this that make me avoid sites that might otherwise get some of my hard earned money.
Don't these dolts understand you don't piss off your potential customers before they spend their money?
|
08-29-10 02:14pm
Reply To Message
|
2
|
anyonebutme (0)
|
REPLY TO #1 - Monahan :
Then from their perspective, you're trying to download the full site on a trial subscription, of which after the affiliate fees, billing fees, hosting fees, etc., she's bringing in like a dollar maybe two for a life of naked photos. People who attempt site rips on trial subscriptions piss off webmasters just the same, probably even more so.
Sites cannot survive off those who just want to queue up as many downloads as their internet connection can handle.
If the speacial deal is, $15/mo. & 14 zip files per day, then each zip file downloaded is less than 4 cents. If you want to agree that a photoset is a ripoff at 4 cents then be my guest to do so.
If you're a fan of Sarah Peachez and still don't think she's worth even a nickel of your hard earned cash...
|
08-29-10 03:58pm
Reply To Message
|
3
|
Monahan (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - anyonebutme :
I und3erstand the argument completely, but if the site wants to limit the d/l's to 14, then it should say so BEFORE, not after someone signs up.
It's like going to a restaurant offering a second meal free with the purchase of a meal, and once you order, they give you half portions because they can't stay in business if they actually honor their advertised offer.
The rip off is false advertising.
|
08-29-10 05:29pm
Reply To Message
|
4
|
tangub (0)
|
REPLY TO #2 - anyonebutme :
You seem to be making a good arguement in favour of webmasters who charge customers $30 for content that can be downloaded in a day.
I'm certainly not interested in ripping the whole site in a day as i'm not even remotely interested in the videos which use the highest bandwidth. All i wanted was a collection of her solo photoshoots and at the end of the day i'm paying a premium price at $4.47 for 3 days access compared to around $15 for the whole month so being restricted to such a limited amount of downloads does feel like i've been ripped off. If they had clearly stated that download limits apply then i would have had the choice to either subscribe for the month or not at all, just seems like a shady business practise to me.
It could also be argued that 4 cents per photoset is expensive when compared to sites like MET or ATK where you can download as many as you want in a day.
|
08-30-10 03:26am
Reply To Message
|
| *Message rows highlighted in light orange are replies to replies. |
|
