The solution for all the free porn and shitty tgps.

[Dirty F]

They all should go for paid spots / paid partner passes only.

This will weed out the newbs/losers/scammers/idiots on the submit side and this will weed out the shitty 2k tgps (whos gonna pay for them) and the tgps with crap traffic.

And im not talking about outrageous prices but just something to stop certain people from submitting.

Fuck im smart.

Discuss

[Jakke PNG]

I know we're partly to blame... but I feel there's atleast as many tgp's nowdays than there are submitters. FHG's are to blame. But since everyone else has them, we gotta have them too.

[Dirty F]

Originally posted by TeenGodFather
I know we're partly to blame... but I feel there's atleast as many tgp's nowdays than there are submitters. FHG's are to blame. But since everyone else has them, we gotta have them too.

Im blaming no one. Im just saying some people should fuck off, on both sides.

[Ron2k1]

The average TGP should do a one time submit fee, or maybe a submit pass for something like one month.

[Dirty F]

Originally posted by Ron2k1
The average TGP should do a one time submit fee, or maybe a submit pass for something like one month.

Thanks for repeating me ?

[pornstar2pac]

Originally posted by Battuss
They all should go for paid spots / paid partner passes only.

This will weed out the newbs/losers/scammers/idiots on the submit side and this will weed out the shitty 2k tgps (whos gonna pay for them) and the tgps with crap traffic.

And im not talking about outrageous prices but just something to stop certain people from submitting.

Fuck im smart.

Discuss

I'm starting to sell links on my blogs for $1 a day, 30 day min. it's a great idea and I'm gonna have 10 blogs doing it this week. 50 links for 30 days is $1,500 x 10 blogs = $15,000 a month with no work what so ever.



damn, I amaze myself

[Dirty F]

Originally posted by pornstar2pac
I'm starting to sell links on my blogs for $1 a day, 30 day min. it's a great idea and I'm gonna have 10 blogs doing it this week. 50 links for 30 days is $1,500 x 10 blogs = $15,000 a month with no work what so ever.



damn, I amaze myself

[pornstar2pac]

Originally posted by Battuss

I think you can do more with blogs then you can with tgps will be only a few select people left making money on them.

[Dirty F]

Originally posted by pornstar2pac
I think you can do more with blogs then you can with tgps will be only a few select people left making money on them.

Im not saying blogs suck im just wondering if you really think youre gonna make 15k a month with this hehe.

[Ron2k1]

Originally posted by Battuss
Thanks for repeating me ?

Yeah you´re right, but I meant a one time fee in stead of a recurring monthly fee for a submit pass

[JamesK]

Originally posted by pornstar2pac
I think you can do more with blogs then you can with tgps will be only a few select people left making money on them.

No way, José.

[pornstar2pac]

Originally posted by Battuss
Im not saying blogs suck im just wondering if you really think youre gonna make 15k a month with this hehe.

lol, I don't.... maybe $4,000-$5,000

[Paul Markham]

In my opinion, and I know I'm an idiot, chargiong for TGP spots will become a norm. Well charging for good TGP spots, the bad ones will be scraping around looking for anything.

It will mean that webmasters who are not making enough money to invest on good spots will be left with poor TGP sites to post on. The sponsors might even start to wonder how much the FHG is costing and how much it's making.

The situation is that it will not cost one surfer. They will still be looking for good porn, the good porn sites will be able to pay for their own listings and they will get stronger.

[jayeff]

Originally posted by Battuss
They all should go for paid spots / paid partner passes only.

This will weed out the newbs/losers/scammers/idiots on the submit side and this will weed out the shitty 2k tgps (whos gonna pay for them) and the tgps with crap traffic.

And im not talking about outrageous prices but just something to stop certain people from submitting.

Fuck im smart.

You described a perfectly reasonable strategy that some already follow, but a) not everyone wants to work the same way, nor do they have the same objectives and b) why would a "shitty TGP" or one with "crap traffic" want to weed itself out (if your strategy would in fact make that happen)?

I don't see how this is "The solution for all the free porn..."? If you could persuade all the small TGPs to self-destruct, by definition that isn't going to make a whole lot of difference to the amount of free porn surfers actually see (500 "small" - by your definition - small TGPs = 1 The Hun).

And so on...

I was submitting galleries to TGPs for maybe 3 years before I ever operated one. I doubt I would have a submit list together yet if I had actually tried to measure the worth of TGPs and their traffic. Apart from the time involved, most sponsors do not have the facility of tracking codes and if they did, to which of the 3-4 TGPs to which I have submitted a particular gallery should I attribute the sale?

I could try an educated guess about traffic quality, but then I would have to ask myself whether it is likely that a TGP which leverages most of its traffic from bookmarkers, trades with other heavily bookmarked TGPs, banner exchange exposures, etc., is going to be as good as one which gets its traffic primarily from submitting galleries to promote itself?

But if you are honest, these aren't educated guesses, just guesses. You don't know if a 50K TGP is carrying 30K of Chinese traffic, or whether a 5K TGP is getting 1K niche targetted hits a day from the SEs. We end up focussing on traffic numbers because they are all we can identify.

Several times a week people w.rite that this TGP sends great quality traffic, or that another sends rubbish. Knowing the practical limitations on measurement, you know that the vast majority of such statements are simply hot air.

The bottom line is that you may not make a sale from 100K hits that one TGP sends you. The single visitor from another might earn you $35. You just don't know, so in the end you settle for whatever approach suits you and as long as it makes money, who can tell you it's wrong?

[Paul Markham]

Originally posted by jayeff
You described a perfectly reasonable strategy that some already follow, but a) not everyone wants to work the same way, nor do they have the same objectives and b) why would a "shitty TGP" or one with "crap traffic" want to weed itself out (if your strategy would in fact make that happen)?

I don't see how this is "The solution for all the free porn..."? If you could persuade all the small TGPs to self-destruct, by definition that isn't going to make a whole lot of difference to the amount of free porn surfers actually see (500 "small" - by your definition - small TGPs = 1 The Hun).

I don't see how you say they would "Self-Destruct" the small TGP site were ones with poor traffic less webmasters posting, ones that have to give away spots. They would not "Self-Destruct" they would just become less and less relevent and die of natural causes.

To many in the "Traffic" business think they create it. Like a sign post creates cars. They steer existing traffic, they don't make people turn on computers and other than helping to addict those who cannot pay at this moment they do nothing to create paysite members. They merely steer them to a paysite.

Losing them would not cost a single surfer. They will never go completely but they will be reduced in the future.

[jayeff]

Originally posted by charly
I don't see how you say they would "Self-Destruct" the small TGP site were ones with poor traffic less webmasters posting, ones that have to give away spots.

Perhaps I took Battuss too literally: he wrote "they should ALL go for...", which, if his idea had any merit, might mean some TGPs assisting in their own destruction.

I wonder though how viable the pay to submit model is in the long term? If someone is making $200K annually from submissions, that puts him in a fairly small company. Yet that (only) equates to $550 a day.

If someone like that submits to say 50 TGPs, he may swallow $1 a day each. But even at that level he has already lost almost 10% of his income. Raise it to $5 a day and a massive 45% is gone. The picture isn't so simple, because if his payment guarantees a top spot, his income should increase some (not as much as you might imagine, because by chance or because he had good galleries, he would have got some top spots under the free-for-all approach).

Further, there are only so many top spots that really worth paying extra for and only so many webmasters capable of taking advantage of them. But TGPs need more than just the top 5-10 listings filled and many submitters are happy to be making (at least per submission), a lot less money than the example I used.

It is really problematic if like me, you submit to 60 or 70 TGPs by hand and another 500 by auto-submission. I don't have a clue where my income comes from. Most likely it has come in from both big and small TGPs, but I'm sure that even after 5 years many still haven't generated a single sale. That's no-one's "fault", just an inevitable consequence of TGP conversion ratios and the laws of statistics.

So how am I supposed to make a decision with any confidence as to whether paying one guy $10 a month is a waste of time or if $10 a day to another is money in the bank? The answer is that I can't and as soon as I either start paying too much in total, or cutting out the wrong TGPs, the whole thing jumps up and bites me.

Buying gallery listings is a whole different ball game from routine TGP submissions. I'm not at all certain that trying to blur the distinction is actually going to work if everyone tries to do it.

[Paul Markham]

jayeff your whole argument is flawed on one simple basis.

Let's say that there are 1,000 webmaster and 1,000,000 surfers ready to pay out $30 a month (the rest don't contribute to the system)

So each webmaster has 1,000 surfers to influence. Lets reduce the number of webmasters by 50% now those left have 2,000 to influence.

Reduce the number of webmasters by 90%, becasue they cannot pay for advertising that will make them money and those that are left are going to have 10 times the traffic to earn a living off.

Sponsors will have a lot less affiliates to watch and organise, the surfers will have less TGPs to visit, making those left even better.

The system of finding affiliates, caring for them, watching them, paying them is becoming so expensive it wil defeat itself. Unless the available traffic to steer increases everyone is going to make less and less profit.

[jayeff]

Originally posted by charly
jayeff your whole argument is flawed on one simple basis.

It's flawed in many respects, which is why I only went so far as to say "I'm not certain..."

To say more at this time is dangerous and your response implies a status quo that can be manipulated to produce straight-line results. In reality there are a host of ever changing variables: not least a constant flow of webmasters joining and leaving the business.

Superficially, the effect of charging to submit is no different than any other increased cost. It will be swallowed easily enough by those at the top of the game and it will raise the barriers to entry. Its impact on the majority who occupy the middle ground is the hardest to determine, particularly as we don't know yet how widespread charging will become, nor at what level it will settle down.

In particular, we don't know what impact more TGPs selling top spots will have. Many people's results in the past have included top listings as well as minor listings. Who knows how far their sales will decline if only minor listings are available to them? Reasonably, reduced sales plus extra costs will push many from profit to loss.

It's all becoming very reminscent of the mini-cab business in London during the early 70's. We used to look after a core of drivers, enough to service our customers. Meanwhile we advertised for new drivers every day in the Evening Standard and charged applicants $50 a week (a month's non refundable deposit payable in advance) "radio rental" to come on the circuit. These guys didn't have a hope in hell of earning any money back, but there were always enough hopefuls that we used to make more from pocketing deposits that we did from our main business.