New Site Review???

[Punyeto]

I'm starting a new site... my first modern(ish) adult site essentially. I'm a software engineer who's worked on mainstream websites for a couple of decades.

At any rate, my first site basically pulls cams via API from different providers and lets users filter by gender, tags, etc. Not particularly new or special, but it's a start. Right now I have cams from Chaturbate and CAM4, with XLoveCash and a couple of others rolling on in a week or so.

QUESTION: If this were your site (Punyeto dot com), what would you do as far as...

1. Ad placement / strategy?
2. Initial traffic acquisition?

[gotonudecom]

I am curious as to the answers you receive.

Good start!

I hope to watch the site grow and succeed.

[emmasexytime]

I would rather start with one of these options
https://nichepornsites.com/how-to-ma...ive-cams-site/


Then build links https://hardlinks.org/

[Silver Crocodile]

Good luck!

[j3rkules]

Good luck with your site but you have only one page. Better you could embed streams on your pages and try to rank them.

[Punyeto]

Originally Posted by emmasexytime

I would rather start with one of these options



Then build links

Reviving an OLD post! Something that always bothered me was the lack of options in cam aggregators that weren't tied to a particular platform (WordPress primarily). I wound up building the API I that I wish existed when I started out. I'm rolling it out as a service. It will launch (hopefully this weekend), with seven sites. I have a couple of questions:

1. What will add more value to webmasters... increasing the number of integrations (cam sites), or increasing the filters (allowing webmasters to niche down).

2. Every option you listed was a script or WordPress plugin. Is a straight API something that adult webmasters shy away from?

3. What would be considered fair pricing? I definitely don't want to hit people over the head, but I do want to make money. This is a very active project, with new integrations happening almost weekly after launch.

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Originally Posted by Punyeto

Reviving an OLD post! Something that always bothered me was the lack of options in cam aggregators that weren't tied to a particular platform (WordPress primarily). I wound up building the API I that I wish existed when I started out. I'm rolling it out as a service. It will launch (hopefully this weekend), with seven sites. I have a couple of questions:

1. What will add more value to webmasters... increasing the number of integrations (cam sites), or increasing the filters (allowing webmasters to niche down).

2. Every option you listed was a script or WordPress plugin. Is a straight API something that adult webmasters shy away from?

3. What would be considered fair pricing? I definitely don't want to hit people over the head, but I do want to make money. This is a very active project, with new integrations happening almost weekly after launch.

There were solutions available for this already, so it's not a brand new idea.

Anyway to the points:

1. definitely a filter - there's an overload of performers on any given site and one needs to target (also with regards to what niche one's sites are)

2. not exactly, but it has to be easy to plug-in, and have enough custom options to make it work for a particular site

The closest to it from what I saw is the Cam4 API toolkit

which allows for live-feeds, fanclubs or galleries to be included.

(if anyone interested you can check the documentation on the site)

3. This is the principal question

The pricing cannot be too high, as the main purpose for what one pays is to save time.
Since tech savvy affiliates may be able to build something themselves.

I'd make an interactive calculator and simply run several projections, to see how many customers one needs to get for different pricing models, to make it worthwhile. Before going public with it. That should give you an answer.

For reference - I'm having a highly established industry friend, who built a top solution for this, but pretty much stopped offering it in public already, as the income didn't justify its further development and maintenance.