Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
Unfortunately that could also apply to 99% of the posters on GFY.
Lots of folks with "theories" (think gideongallery) and not much real experience in knowing how to entertain and excite their customer base and grow a business.
Paul...why argue with Shap over something that Shap has PROVED he is really, really good at? As he said..you don't see him trying to tell you how to shoot a photo, so why argue with presumptions and theories with a man who actually DID it? |
Well Damian in his ignorance set that path. I think I proved he could of made more.
The business model of employing full time shooters to create a
commodity which has many outlets to sell to isn't one I dreamed up. It's common in offline porn. Hustler, Score, Bluebird, DD productions, Steve Hicks, us, I know for sure did this. I suspect DDF, Perfect Gonzo, Viv Thomas, Wicked, Vivid and many others did the same. Some for their own label exclusively others to sell to different outlets.
So let's assume, you're niche is the big tits niche. One of the top companies in this niche is Score. They employed in house shooters. Their London end was John Graham, him and his 2 employed shooters would shoot a lot of content of big tit girls and sell it to magazines. He employed shooter who were the right level and made a huge profit on their work, without any online sales.
Could you have employed one of these kind of guys and with your marketing expertise sell their content as a commodity to other outlets besides your paysites?
Quote:
|
He's right and you're wrong.
|
Reading my last post. Want to think he missed out along with many others?
Quote:
Yes, it would be awfully nice if we could all get the greatest photographers in the world to shoot all of our content and pay them the price they ask.
Unfortunately it would have the opposite effect of the one you are proposing. Instead of making more money...we would be losing tons of money.
|
So why would you lose money employing people who could produce a product that made a profit offline and was free to the paysite?
Yes employing someone like even us, would of put a severe dent in your profits. Employing someone like Holly, would wipe most out. Employing one of the shooters they employed would of doubled or even more the profit margins.
Quote:
And for the record...a "solo girl" site is pretty much a site based around one girl. KellyMadison.Com, ClaudiaMarie.Com, CelesteFox.Com, BrittanyLove.Com etc.
And they are usually (not always) run by the model and her husband/boyfriend/suitcase pimp.
|
Semantics. Solo girl to me is a scene with a solo girl in. not narrow thinking of a site based on one girl. Of course sites based on one girl were often small fry in the world of porn. Well it was when it came to buying the commodity. How many of those sites had the girls under exclusive contracts like Wicked, Vivid and others did?
Quote:
I can't even fathom how you could equate a "solo girl" site with a big "corporate" site like ATK full of bought content of hundreds of different girls.
That's a big ol' generic porn site with a theme. Not a solo girl site.
|
Because you think in only one field. I think of the whole porn field.
Yes Shap did very well. Could he of done better by employing full time a person who
knew about the commodity this business is based on?