You may find this interesting - GoFuckYourself.com

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 02:12 AM

Don't know him, except he's a friend of a friend but some of you that buy/sell images may find this interesting.

http://www.ynotmasters.com/news/ynew...802/page4.html

What do you think?

4Pics · 03-01-2002, 02:18 AM

too much text for this time of night.

funkmaster · 03-01-2002, 02:53 AM

... same here, too much to read, try to compile this into 2 lines of text ... and I may read the original ....

Gary · 03-01-2002, 02:55 AM

The gist of it it that we should be paying $2000 bucks a pic for content instead of 25 cents. Oh and people who shoot pics for the web are crappy and people who shoot pics for Hustler are gods amongst men. That basically covers it.

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 04:32 AM

No Gary
What it says is that the standard of some content on the Internet is low.
This could be because of the attitude of those like who cannot be bothered to read it.
It's alos a wake up call, because if some sites continue to put out the quality of what they are, they will go.
Our job is to give a guy a hard on and then get him to jerk off. It hasn't changed for 4,000+ years.
What a man wants is quick relief, not 60 minutes wading through boring pictures that are making him limp, ever worked out why a video porno scene is 12-15 minutes of sex?
If you think this market is different be specific, what do you think the surfer wants?
At the moment it caters for those who can only afford $20-30 a month for this satisfaction, but as the porno professional moves in a lot the old computer geeks will be sqeezed out.
Remember this club you belong to, does not concern the surfer having his 15 minutes of fun.

SNOW · 03-01-2002, 04:45 AM

It's a great article.. And i Do agree with how they explained there are too many guys shooting amateur and teen and really easy to do... We need to fill all the niches..

Even black content is scarce..Anyone can shoot content and look like a star on gfy LOL........

Ted · 03-01-2002, 04:53 AM

This is a business, why would I pay more for content than I had to as long as it performed it's specific task ?

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted
This is a business, why would I pay more for content than I had to as long as it performed it's specific task ?

Ted is 101% right, I saw it once I read his post.
But the trick is too identify it's specific task. This is what the article is saying, what is it's task.
Fill a page or provide quick relief?
Never pay more than anything is worth.
But always be prepared to pay for what it is meant to do.

Keev · 03-01-2002, 05:01 AM

Problem is Charly why market/spam/advertise your content here if 95% of the visitors are webmasters that visit GFY are without a paysite if you dont sell to webmasters if they are going to use it for tgp galleries, AVS or general promotional use?

Yes i understand why, and the arguement angles to come but just for the sake of topic.

Why cut off one of your hands that feeds you, if you dont have too...

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keev
Problem is Charly why market/spam/advertise your content here if 95% of the visitors are webmasters that visit GFY are without a paysite if you dont sell to webmasters if they are going to use it for tgp galleries, AVS or general promotional use?

Yes i understand why, and the arguement angles to come but just for the sake of topic.

Why cut off one of your hands that feeds you, if you dont have too...

Sorry Keev, just do not understand what you mean, 95% of GFY visitors, our sites visitors. Or what?
Just ran a poll of the people who do buy and many said, without being asked, that we make the contract clearer. That we do not allow our pics to go to tgp, AVS or for webmasters to give them away to other webmasters to provide "feeder" sites.
Are you one of the guys that contacted us asking to buy our sets to give them away again free?

Mikey · 03-01-2002, 05:14 AM

Quote:

It's alos a wake up call, because if some sites continue to put out the quality of what they are, they will go.
Our job is to give a guy a hard on and then get him to jerk off. It hasn't changed for 4,000+ years.

The 'net has been around for 4,000+ years?! Damn, i gottta get out more.

Quality of content is decreasing? Well boo-fucking-hoo. Who says its decreasing, there is just more selection.

Just because an image costs $2 bucks doesn't necessarily make it better than than an image that costs 2 cents.

I happen to like content that looks like it was shot by my neighbors while they were getting their groove on. Forget all those models with make-up and perfect hair, give me a babe still sweating from doing the nasty.

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 06:15 AM

Mikey
Porn has been around 4,000 years isn't that the business we're in?

Plus of course if a guy is good enough to shoot for a market that pays $5,000 it makes perfect sense to sell it for $500.

And you are DEAD right nothing sells better than a girl who looks like she's been fucked rotten, except a girl who looks like she wants to be fucked rotten.
The problem with the pictures the article refers to, is the girl looks like she is waiting for a bus or something even less exciting

SykkBoy · 03-01-2002, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
Mikey
Porn has been around 4,000 years isn't that the business we're in?

Plus of course if a guy is good enough to shoot for a market that pays $5,000 it makes perfect sense to sell it for $500.

And you are DEAD right nothing sells better than a girl who looks like she's been fucked rotten, except a girl who looks like she wants to be fucked rotten.
The problem with the pictures the article refers to, is the girl looks like she is waiting for a bus or something even less exciting

actually, I'm in the sales and marketing business...whether it's tits, ass or vitamins, I market a product...

as for this high and mighty attitude of photographers who've shot for print? Who cares? The surfers to my sites want the digital cam look, they would probably strangle me if I tried to put some fake blonde bimbo with high gloss and perfect lighting on my site...while I'm sure there is a market for the "high class" ultra jerk off stuff, most internet surfers could care less, they just wanna see pussy and could give a shit if it'd Jenna Jameson or Edna from the third trailer on the left (well, ok some surfers care ;))

Different photographers shoot for different niches and markets and amatuer happens to be a hot market now...nothing worse than some "pro" photographer shooting some fake titted porn bimbo trying to pass it off as "amateur" just because the picture is taken in front of a ratty couch.

So, ease up on the ego and shoot what you wish to shoot and sell what you can, but at the end of the day, all photogrpahers are guys who point a camera at naked people.... (granted some better than others ;)))

SykkBoy · 03-01-2002, 08:56 AM

eek, re-read my post and it sounded like I wasn't giving photgraphers their due credit....

that wasn't the case...I just get upset at the high and mighty attitudes some have.....

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 01:24 PM

Just what the Internet needs another marketeer who does not care if it's tits "ass" (isn't that a donkey) or vitamin pills.

Amateur is a good market, the richest photographer I know shoots a shit load of it. But he shoots it right, average girls having a good time being fucked in front of the camera.

Go to the site log in (use a fake email if you're frightened I will email you) and see what he does. Sells it all over the internet and his sets sell as well as ours. I have no problems with amateur. I've got a whole amateur section on the site.

The article which all this is refering to, was about the similarity to all the stuff Robert Taylor saw at the show. To be honest he is right. Few of the shooters had developed a style that set them apart from the next one.

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 03:04 PM

Different photographers shoot for different niches and markets and amatuer happens to be a hot market now...nothing worse than some "pro" photographer shooting some fake titted porn bimbo trying to pass it off as "amateur" just because the picture is taken in front of a ratty couch.

SykkBoy2
Seriously go look at our site I think you will be very pleasently surprised. No Teens in full make up or plastic boobs jobs. You already have one of our teen pictures on a front door.

Amateur section features real housewives no bimbos, well only a couple of them

But they were shot in their homes.

Try it I promise I'll not bite you.

BV · 03-01-2002, 04:05 PM

Quote:

I happen to like content that looks like it was shot by my neighbors while they were getting their groove on. Forget all those models with make-up and perfect hair, give me a babe still sweating from doing the nasty.

Amen Brutha!

Mikey · 03-01-2002, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Just what the Internet needs another marketeer who does not care if it's tits "ass" (isn't that a donkey) or vitamin pills.

I don't care if it's tits, ass or vitamin pills. Not everyone runs a paysite. Alot of people make there money promoting other people's paysites. Are they selling porn, yes. But ultimately they are selling traffic.

Quote:

The problem with the pictures the article refers to, is the girl looks like she is waiting for a bus or something even less exciting

What, am I the only one (besides BV

) who sees a girl on the street and wonders what kind of panty she has on, or if she is shaved. That content is gold. Yeah, amateur is a good niche, always has been. Look at ranks.sextracker.com and in the top 50 sites you will see tgp's, cjs and amateur/voyeur sites like voyeurweb, amateurweb, etc. So there is something to be said about a girl waiting for a bus or something less exciting.

Quote:

Plus of course if a guy is good enough to shoot for a market that pays $5,000 it makes perfect sense to sell it for $500.

I blame collusion amongst the photographers for letting that happen. I remember a few years ago when you HAD to buy content that cost $1-$2 a pic just because that was all there was available. Now there is more available, prices have come down. Partly because people were sick of paying so much for stuff that wasn't what they liked and decided to do it themselves. And partly because they felt by undercutting prices they could make money.

But I think you are getting two things mixed up. The print market and the internet market. They are different.

Paul Markham · 03-01-2002, 08:37 PM

Mikey
Selling traffic, just get them to the site. that all that matters is it?
No wonder they move on and stay traffic.

Look at my site, I hava an amateur section.
You are one of the few people who want to look at pussy with a bored face. Most people want to look at pussy of a girl that wants to fuck.

Yes we used to get $3+ an image 5 years ago. But there were few places to sell it and those that bought wanted better quality than today. It was not better for photographers.

The internet is diferent, tell me what is different.
I'm in the business of delivering "Jerk off" material. What business are you in?

Again you want amateur look at my site for what amateur means to me. The girl from the bus stop being fucked, by whoever turns up cos she's a horny bitch and not looking bored.

Mikey · 03-01-2002, 11:26 PM

Quote:

I'm in the business of delivering "Jerk off" material.

I thought you were in the content biz?

What business am I in? Depends how you look at it. Is the newspaper delivery man in the news business? Sure he provides news. But he makes his money delivering newspapers. Am I in the porn business? I provide porn, but I make my money sending surfers to paysites to sign up. Providing porn is a means to an end.

Yes you do have an amateur section. Wonderful.

Quote:

The internet is diferent, tell me what is different.

Haven't you figured it out? Maybe ask the guy at Hustler who signs the checks. Why else would he pay so much for his content when you can't sell similiar content for 1/10th the price on the internet? Different driving forces. Selling content to a magazine is one thing. Selling content to a webmaster is another. Why do so many successful businesses try a web venture only to shut down a year later after burning so much money?

But honestly, I don't want to start anything with. I just don't see it your way.

Quote:

Selling traffic, just get them to the site. that all that matters is it?

Yeah, basically that is all that matters. You could have the greatest site, the best content in the world, but without traffic you won't make any money because no one will see it. Just like a television station, you could have great programs, but if your station is in the middle of the desert no one is going to watch, however if your station is in London chances are you will get alot of people to watch. The more people watch the more money you will make "selling" your viewers to your advertisers.

Paul Markham · 03-02-2002, 01:43 AM

Hi Mikey
I do understand that you have to drive traffic to a site. That is where the magazines failed, well some did. they thought people would come if they built the site. BOING, They know that now so webmasters be warned.
Some of the traffic has to "Park" and some sites are not that good they would be well advised to spend a littlet less in driving traffic and a little more on improving the content.
You earn money from traffic, I earn money from content. We have to meet in the middle, if the internet is too become more profitable.
Look at what you are driving them to and ask yourself could we make it so more park?

Content is, or should be, "Jerk off" material. What it is not is, JUST a picture of a naked girl with her legs open or some one fucking her. It has to be a bit more. A pornographers job is to arouse the imagination. Most of the time it's this fantasy "this girl loves it (sex) so much, she would of satisfied me if I was there.
I heard this recently, Are you a chef, cook or butcher?
A chef makes you hungry.
A cook satisfies your hunger.
A butcher displays meat.
Could a site be improved to make more people stop ?
If someone just sells traffic they do not need it to stop, if they buy traffic they do not earn until it stops.
This is what conversion rates are about.

The reason why Internet pays 1/10 of what magazines pay. SIMPLE
Not enough traffic is parking at most sites. They cannot afford to pay more.
The webcam sets ups in Prague cost a lot more than a site full of images. Why do they do it? People stop being traffic.

We are looking at the same coin, but see different sides.
The site I sell content to need better traffic, the sites you sell traffic to need better content.

SykkBoy · 03-02-2002, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
Just what the Internet needs another marketeer who does not care if it's tits "ass" (isn't that a donkey) or vitamin pills.

well, without marketers, there are no customers for paysites and thus no places for you to sell your content....

shooting for magazines and shooting for the internet are two different things...a magazine is glossy and glam...the internet? not every web surfer has an LCD screen with perfect resolution at 1600x1200 with a cable modem to download huge sized files...it's about adapting to the medium...

I'm not discounting the glitzy glammy stuff, hell Mac And Bumble are doing quite well with it, but the average webmaster can't afford images like that and most surfers could care less...they want quantity over quality...sad but true....they'd rather have 1 million fuzzy pics than 10,000 pristine perfectly lit glamorous airbrushed babes....

as for anon logins? I go through contentspotlife and check out all there is and yes, I've checked your content and yup, really good stuff...this wasn't about the quality of your content, but the way you seem to act as if you were in some superior realm over a guy shooting pictures of his wife and her friends with a digital camera....relax, keep your content high quality and I'm sure it sells itself, but it doesn't mean the guy who's lighting skills might be subpar, isn't entitled to sell his content at a lower rate or make him any less worthwhile....

hell, I like the guy who can shoot good "professional" amatuer content...check AaronM's stuff and Unseen World's stuff (must something good in the air in Oregon ;)))

pr0view · 03-02-2002, 02:22 AM

i view this article as just the next step of someone trying to sound very professioanl into justinfying high prices of the content. and this is completely away from the reality.

i am very well aware what do my surfers want. everyone is tired of the super-looking, make-up-perfected, 6-feet tall gorgeous babes shot naked and/or fucking in the ruins of an anceint fortress... the surfers are savvy enough to know that this is a complete set-up and there ain't such women in their life.

what they want is a next-door babe - the same type they can see each morning out of the window. no one has a fantasy about jenna jameson today. they all dream of something that is close to a babe they can fuck. it's that simple.

i was sending traffic to a cumshot site whose tour was built on fabulous models with cum all over their faces; they were looking really brilliant, seductive and beautiful. guess what? 1:1000.

then i started sending traffic to an over-exposed amateur cumshot site - ordinary girls, some were even ugly and the quality of the pics was average. can you guess? 1:300.

you want to make sales? show them something that they believe is possible. point them to a place where they will feel comfortable. stop hitting them with those super-porn-models - the people know that those are out of their reach.

i rest my case.

Paul Markham · 03-02-2002, 03:51 AM

Pr0view has it right, the surfer has to believe "She wants to fuck and she will fuck me" What Robert I think is saying is that a lot of what he saw did not reflect that and it all looked the same.

The Interent will never pay what a big magazine pays for a set.

But it takes 2-3 hours to shoot one of those, everything has to be just right. you can only shoot 2 max a day. And you see 1 girl a month who is good enough.

Set pays$3-4,000 in the first year, you wait 6-12 months to be paid.

The net is different, you see 2-3 girls a week good enough and pretty. Can easily shoot 6 sets a day, it's a breeze.

A set is worth $4-500 in the first year and the money comes in from the first day you post the set. And by shooting 2-3 times a week you make more money and there's less risk of losing money.

So the internet is a very good market. You just have to gear up for it. The problem is that a lot of the shooters need more experience to develope their individual styles. That does not say "Stylish"

Rubbish sells, but good rubbish sells even better

pr0view · 03-02-2002, 04:02 AM

can you possibly imagine what will happen if the price of the content goes up to reach the one that is shot for the mags? hmm? how much should a paysite charge then? $100 a month and probably even more... can your average porno pete pay that? i doubt it.

anyway, the internet is a much vast medium than the adult mags. you can have your "french restaurants" (super-quality pics, very little content, high price), your "italian and/or pizza restaurants" (average quality, lots of stuff, average prices) and even your bigmacs (amateur sites, little exclusive low-quality content at very low prices).

that's it - diversity and everything for everyone

however, i'd better sell lollipops than jaguars

Paul Markham · 03-02-2002, 10:28 AM

I agree there is no way the internet can pay what a big mag pay, they sell half a million copies and make back the complete cost of the mag on the ads they sell.
That is until a website can do the same. Which is unlikely and not needed. The strength of the internet is that a site can cater to the more extreme and less mainstream. Also as it's the cheapest delivery of porn it will always have a lot of "Amateur models" sites. Which is the girl next door looking as if she's ready to fuck.
Aaron and Tom are not bad at all, at what they do. But a lot are bad. This guy for instance.

http://www.sexcontents.com/content/m...ristina/green/

Maybe it sells and he makes loads of money. You're right it's for one end of the market.

Guess I should not worry about it and get on with what I do on the net cos it seems to work.

03-01-2002, 02:12 AM	#1
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	You may find this interesting Don't know him, except he's a friend of a friend but some of you that buy/sell images may find this interesting. http://www.ynotmasters.com/news/ynew...802/page4.html What do you think? __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-01-2002, 02:55 AM	#4
Gary Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Kimmykims couch Posts: 6,110	The gist of it it that we should be paying $2000 bucks a pic for content instead of 25 cents. Oh and people who shoot pics for the web are crappy and people who shoot pics for Hustler are gods amongst men. That basically covers it. __________________ Up to 35$ per join...!

03-01-2002, 04:32 AM	#5
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	No Gary What it says is that the standard of some content on the Internet is low. This could be because of the attitude of those like who cannot be bothered to read it. It's alos a wake up call, because if some sites continue to put out the quality of what they are, they will go. Our job is to give a guy a hard on and then get him to jerk off. It hasn't changed for 4,000+ years. What a man wants is quick relief, not 60 minutes wading through boring pictures that are making him limp, ever worked out why a video porno scene is 12-15 minutes of sex? If you think this market is different be specific, what do you think the surfer wants? At the moment it caters for those who can only afford $20-30 a month for this satisfaction, but as the porno professional moves in a lot the old computer geeks will be sqeezed out. Remember this club you belong to, does not concern the surfer having his 15 minutes of fun. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-01-2002, 05:01 AM	#9
Keev Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 5,335	Problem is Charly why market/spam/advertise your content here if 95% of the visitors are webmasters that visit GFY are without a paysite if you dont sell to webmasters if they are going to use it for tgp galleries, AVS or general promotional use? Yes i understand why, and the arguement angles to come but just for the sake of topic. Why cut off one of your hands that feeds you, if you dont have too... __________________ ReliableServers.com - NO REF LINK!

03-01-2002, 06:15 AM	#12
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Mikey Porn has been around 4,000 years isn't that the business we're in? Plus of course if a guy is good enough to shoot for a market that pays $5,000 it makes perfect sense to sell it for $500. And you are DEAD right nothing sells better than a girl who looks like she's been fucked rotten, except a girl who looks like she wants to be fucked rotten. The problem with the pictures the article refers to, is the girl looks like she is waiting for a bus or something even less exciting __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-01-2002, 02:18 AM	#2
4Pics Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 7,952	too much text for this time of night.

03-01-2002, 02:53 AM	#3
funkmaster So Fucking Banned Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: shell beach Posts: 7,938	... same here, too much to read, try to compile this into 2 lines of text ... and I may read the original ....

03-01-2002, 04:45 AM	#6
SNOW Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 3,963	It's a great article.. And i Do agree with how they explained there are too many guys shooting amateur and teen and really easy to do... We need to fill all the niches.. Even black content is scarce..Anyone can shoot content and look like a star on gfy LOL........

03-01-2002, 04:53 AM	#7
Ted Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 830	This is a business, why would I pay more for content than I had to as long as it performed it's specific task ?

03-01-2002, 08:56 AM	#14
SykkBoy Jesus loves bacon Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Sin City, Motherfucker Posts: 19,969	eek, re-read my post and it sounded like I wasn't giving photgraphers their due credit.... that wasn't the case...I just get upset at the high and mighty attitudes some have..... __________________ Support my new movie “The Second Coming”

03-01-2002, 01:24 PM	#15
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Just what the Internet needs another marketeer who does not care if it's tits "ass" (isn't that a donkey) or vitamin pills. Amateur is a good market, the richest photographer I know shoots a shit load of it. But he shoots it right, average girls having a good time being fucked in front of the camera. Go to the site log in (use a fake email if you're frightened I will email you) and see what he does. Sells it all over the internet and his sets sell as well as ours. I have no problems with amateur. I've got a whole amateur section on the site. The article which all this is refering to, was about the similarity to all the stuff Robert Taylor saw at the show. To be honest he is right. Few of the shooters had developed a style that set them apart from the next one. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-01-2002, 03:04 PM	#16
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Different photographers shoot for different niches and markets and amatuer happens to be a hot market now...nothing worse than some "pro" photographer shooting some fake titted porn bimbo trying to pass it off as "amateur" just because the picture is taken in front of a ratty couch. SykkBoy2 Seriously go look at our site I think you will be very pleasently surprised. No Teens in full make up or plastic boobs jobs. You already have one of our teen pictures on a front door. Amateur section features real housewives no bimbos, well only a couple of them But they were shot in their homes. Try it I promise I'll not bite you. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-01-2002, 08:37 PM	#19
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Mikey Selling traffic, just get them to the site. that all that matters is it? No wonder they move on and stay traffic. Look at my site, I hava an amateur section. You are one of the few people who want to look at pussy with a bored face. Most people want to look at pussy of a girl that wants to fuck. Yes we used to get $3+ an image 5 years ago. But there were few places to sell it and those that bought wanted better quality than today. It was not better for photographers. The internet is diferent, tell me what is different. I'm in the business of delivering "Jerk off" material. What business are you in? Again you want amateur look at my site for what amateur means to me. The girl from the bus stop being fucked, by whoever turns up cos she's a horny bitch and not looking bored. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-02-2002, 01:43 AM	#21
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Hi Mikey I do understand that you have to drive traffic to a site. That is where the magazines failed, well some did. they thought people would come if they built the site. BOING, They know that now so webmasters be warned. Some of the traffic has to "Park" and some sites are not that good they would be well advised to spend a littlet less in driving traffic and a little more on improving the content. You earn money from traffic, I earn money from content. We have to meet in the middle, if the internet is too become more profitable. Look at what you are driving them to and ask yourself could we make it so more park? Content is, or should be, "Jerk off" material. What it is not is, JUST a picture of a naked girl with her legs open or some one fucking her. It has to be a bit more. A pornographers job is to arouse the imagination. Most of the time it's this fantasy "this girl loves it (sex) so much, she would of satisfied me if I was there. I heard this recently, Are you a chef, cook or butcher? A chef makes you hungry. A cook satisfies your hunger. A butcher displays meat. Could a site be improved to make more people stop ? If someone just sells traffic they do not need it to stop, if they buy traffic they do not earn until it stops. This is what conversion rates are about. The reason why Internet pays 1/10 of what magazines pay. SIMPLE Not enough traffic is parking at most sites. They cannot afford to pay more. The webcam sets ups in Prague cost a lot more than a site full of images. Why do they do it? People stop being traffic. We are looking at the same coin, but see different sides. The site I sell content to need better traffic, the sites you sell traffic to need better content. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-02-2002, 02:22 AM	#23
pr0view Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: Europe Posts: 270	i view this article as just the next step of someone trying to sound very professioanl into justinfying high prices of the content. and this is completely away from the reality. i am very well aware what do my surfers want. everyone is tired of the super-looking, make-up-perfected, 6-feet tall gorgeous babes shot naked and/or fucking in the ruins of an anceint fortress... the surfers are savvy enough to know that this is a complete set-up and there ain't such women in their life. what they want is a next-door babe - the same type they can see each morning out of the window. no one has a fantasy about jenna jameson today. they all dream of something that is close to a babe they can fuck. it's that simple. i was sending traffic to a cumshot site whose tour was built on fabulous models with cum all over their faces; they were looking really brilliant, seductive and beautiful. guess what? 1:1000. then i started sending traffic to an over-exposed amateur cumshot site - ordinary girls, some were even ugly and the quality of the pics was average. can you guess? 1:300. you want to make sales? show them something that they believe is possible. point them to a place where they will feel comfortable. stop hitting them with those super-porn-models - the people know that those are out of their reach. i rest my case.

03-02-2002, 03:51 AM	#24
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Pr0view has it right, the surfer has to believe "She wants to fuck and she will fuck me" What Robert I think is saying is that a lot of what he saw did not reflect that and it all looked the same. The Interent will never pay what a big magazine pays for a set. But it takes 2-3 hours to shoot one of those, everything has to be just right. you can only shoot 2 max a day. And you see 1 girl a month who is good enough. Set pays$3-4,000 in the first year, you wait 6-12 months to be paid. The net is different, you see 2-3 girls a week good enough and pretty. Can easily shoot 6 sets a day, it's a breeze. A set is worth $4-500 in the first year and the money comes in from the first day you post the set. And by shooting 2-3 times a week you make more money and there's less risk of losing money. So the internet is a very good market. You just have to gear up for it. The problem is that a lot of the shooters need more experience to develope their individual styles. That does not say "Stylish" Rubbish sells, but good rubbish sells even better __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

03-02-2002, 04:02 AM	#25
pr0view Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Location: Europe Posts: 270	can you possibly imagine what will happen if the price of the content goes up to reach the one that is shot for the mags? hmm? how much should a paysite charge then? $100 a month and probably even more... can your average porno pete pay that? i doubt it. anyway, the internet is a much vast medium than the adult mags. you can have your "french restaurants" (super-quality pics, very little content, high price), your "italian and/or pizza restaurants" (average quality, lots of stuff, average prices) and even your bigmacs (amateur sites, little exclusive low-quality content at very low prices). that's it - diversity and everything for everyone however, i'd better sell lollipops than jaguars

03-02-2002, 10:28 AM	#26
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	I agree there is no way the internet can pay what a big mag pay, they sell half a million copies and make back the complete cost of the mag on the ads they sell. That is until a website can do the same. Which is unlikely and not needed. The strength of the internet is that a site can cater to the more extreme and less mainstream. Also as it's the cheapest delivery of porn it will always have a lot of "Amateur models" sites. Which is the girl next door looking as if she's ready to fuck. Aaron and Tom are not bad at all, at what they do. But a lot are bad. This guy for instance. http://www.sexcontents.com/content/m...ristina/green/ Maybe it sells and he makes loads of money. You're right it's for one end of the market. Guess I should not worry about it and get on with what I do on the net cos it seems to work. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70