View Single Post
Old 02-27-2011, 05:09 AM  
Paul Markham
Too old to care
 
Paul Markham's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws.
Posts: 52,943
I suppose I upset people from day 1 on the boards by attacking the content some were producing. It was a justified reaction because time has proved me right.

Unseenworld, crap content and he's gone.
Lady Pink and her husband had a content store full of crap content and it's gone.
Many found they could make more selling custom than selling non exclusive.

To my knowledge none sold to magazines. Even today I've been inside a few sites that many here rave about the shooter and the content. It would never sell to magazines and sales to DVD would be poor.

The reasons are simple. On stills far too many basic elementary mistakes. Bad posing, framing, lack of poses, repeated poses over and over again and often images that wouldn't print on paper. Usually too wide exposure and therefore bad depth of field or reflected light going into the lens, which makes the image look out of focus. An editor would look at a set like these for a minute and dismiss them.

Videos lack a vitality, variation, imagination and generally just churned out. The DVD market has enough of that already. DVD sales are built on loyalty to the brand and label. If a series produces it sells to the shops which sell to consumers. It's very much like traffic, if a sponsor converts and retains he can spend more on traffic and his affiliates earn more.

So did the industry lose money going the route of poor content?

Yes, Yes and Yes.

A content rep going around the magazines could of sold a $1/4 million no problems. Selling 83 licenses for sets to all the magazines country by country was not a problem. IF THE CONTENT WAS GOOD ENOUGH.

The problem is you don't get that quality of porn for $300 or $700 a scene.

Exactly the same applies to the DVD industry. $25,000 Profit from a GOOD DVD in any most niches and certainly teens, HC, Big Tits was easy.

Most of this side of the industry was too insular and arrogant to think about it and suffered.

Money on the table was left there. site retention sucked and the number of sites competing with each one probably multiplied by a factor of ten. Because filling a site with cheap content was easy.

Am I right?

Over 15 years after we sold our first sets, for sale on the Internet to a company who had a site called www.thrills.com. We are still here and even took some money today.

How many of you can say that?

You can't deny the facts, we still make enough to stay independent and keep the sites up. 1995 to 2011.
Paul Markham is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote