Quote:
Originally Posted by AmeliaG
I like you and like your work, so don't take this wrong, but name 3 pay sites (not owned by tubes because they monetize differently) which are paying remotely $10k a scene for pay site content.
|
Why would you limit the companies to who are not involved in tubes? As an industry matures, the strongest survive and the weak begin to die, obviously. The remaining companies begin to be a little more corporate and have their hands in everything as few companies begin to take over. Almost all big companies have their hands in other brands/including tubes. Half of them, thats the reason theyre still alive to begin with. It bought them the profit/time in order to learn what sells in todays market and continue to be successful. So basically youre saying, what small sites who can't afford or weren't smart enough to get involved in tube sites are still producing content at a high cost? Obviously that number will be limited. It has no reflection on the current state of paysites
Blacked owners are involved in a large tube, however it doesn't mean they could not have reached the success without it, it just helped them reach the level they are at, perhaps at a faster pace. Anybody is free to use tubes to their advantage. It is just more obvious to tube owners what sells and what profit they can make off their sites so theyre more willing to spend, they also have less "risk" because they have the traffic already and aren't as scared to spend the money. They were also the ones smart enough and had the budget in order to get involved with them. The people without the budget weren't typically the smartest, given how lucrative this industry was.
Not being involved in tubes isn't an excuse to be a failure.
Tubes are the highest source of traffic/sales, so why would they not be involved?
Strange question is all