Doc,
I don't surf review sites much but I guess we agree on the one paying for our our entire adult online bizz is still a surfer. They used to be simple and easy to figure out and handle.....Now they are smart, educated & verbally active online and they don;t take shit from anybody.
I had meetings so many times last year with all our guys about our local Dutch PPM, PPC and VOD sites to try to figure out what the hell the surfers think these days. We even got psychology experts onboard in the end and tested the weirest stuff on sites.
Let me ask you (and others); Why does Walmart go up & up & up where others fail big time no matter how big they are.
There lies the answer.

I wuz here

lol, thanks jim - heidi rocks ;)

Yes, bump 4 Steffan and the excellent content he provides

Walmart vs. Online isn't really fair. From 1/6 the people online, to everything you can do outside of porn vs. porn.

Walmart doesn't always grow, they are always expanding. Overall growth is bound to happen when you can expand and be large enough to force competing markets out as well as force products to pay your price or go out of business with th eothers.

They don't always grow in some areas, some areas they are dieing and shrinking while stores like Target take over. But globally, they are expanding and always moving into areas that 'need' a Walmart. They also have a stepping stone store, build cheap at first and expand if the foot traffic builds.

Totally different game..

I was aiming at their clear (pricing) structure and what they mass communicate (spend less, get the same quality).

Wallmart failed in Germany, miserably. Different market.

But you are right that the surfer has to make the payment. So you have to collect those willing and able to pay. The question is which percentage of your customers won´t buy a membership if streaming is the only option. I can´t answer it right now, but maybe it´s worth to check.

Another option could be streaming for the regular membership and an additional fee for downloading a clip.

:thumbsup
Cherish those :winkwink:

or maybe stream the latest 10 updates and download just for the older ones?

I'm ok with reviewers letting people know what options they have for each site.

We put a lot of work into providing our members with the content and formats they want, be it streaming or downloadable. Personally since I put this extra work into making everything available in multiple formats, I appreciate that it's noticed and seen by the consumer as a benefit.

Tell me how and I´ll do so.:1orglaugh

The Fourth Commandment: "Thou shalt honor thy paying customer."

Your sig just rocks mucho big time :)

The Madonna method of marketing - as she once put it, "They may be talking trash...but at least they're talking about me."

In the case of a review site saying, "The most disgusting black porn site ever" - I think would actually pique a surfer's interest...rather than make him turn away. However, if they made that comment and coupled it with "...with poor quality photography and cheaply shot video" - then I'd say the Madonna marketing principle isn't necessarily a good thing.

:2 cents:

A consumer will always see it as a negative point though.

Take music for instance. I buy mine at Amazon.com because there is no copyright protection that only allows me to play it on a certain number of computers or devices (like iTunes).

Sure it might not be fair, but a consumer is always going to want to get the most for his dollar. A review is written for them, not the affiliate program. It's how they get repeat traffic. Maybe it's not a negative point to you, but I'd garner that most consumers want to download and consider sites that allow it to be better.

Several factors to their formula.

My guess is they consistently offer lower prices and wide selection in a range of products and services...all under one roof. Shoppers don't have to walk through an entire 10-acre mall and visit a half dozen stores to get what they need. They tend to cater their products to the surrounding demographic - our local city has a disproportionately high number of seniors and retirees...so WalMart places stronger emphasis on pharmaceuticals and products that appeal to the needs of seniors.

WalMart also offers free parking, which further hurts the smaller 'downtown' competition stores that only have on-street meter parking or tiny parking lots that are always full.

This isn't really streaming vs not here....this is about being penalized for using DRM.

Paysites could use DRM the way apple does with itunes....where the product can be downloaded but can only be played on 5 devices total. This would prevent the piracy/tube site issues (most of them anyways) while still allowing the customer to download the product to view at their leisure, even after cancelling.

The problem is that review sites and free sites in general that coddle the surfers view DRM as a negative....as if we're somehow fucking over the customer by not allowing them to share the product with 10,000 of their closest friends.

That attitude needs to change IMO.

It's not particularly difficult to record a stream now, but it's still a hassle. I would guess that means that soon enough, people will be recording flash vids in firefox. The alpha nerd porn fans have been trading flv's of camshows etc for a while

First smart thing you've said on here in quite some time. :thumbsup

I would like to expand that statement to encompass Aryan people in general, not just those who live inside of today's German borders. :upsidedow

this sort of sounds like the bitching and whining steve did when review site exposed the fact that his solo girl had quit. And the promised live interaction was really some bubba pretending to be the girl.

you have to remember that an honest review fully disclosing a negative will give a review site repeat customers who will signup to multiple sites

while a white wash (to benefit your specific program, and a tiny portion of their income) will cause surfers not to trust the site and therefore use someone elses.


fair market economic at work.

Would love to hear from more review sites in here!

As an affiliate myself I see it like this...Some sites ARE DVD download sites. Think Videosz Yes, that is their gig. But a site like mine is exclusive and unique. I personally write, shoot, edit, and create every last thing on it. In order for MY customers to have something of value it HAS to be protected. Otherwise why did you just pay $34.99 if you could have seen the entire members area ripped on a torrent site for free?

A review site should be taking that standard and being smart about it. Yes, you want to grade a dvd download site by how good their downloads are. And you want to grade a solo girl site with exclusive content by just how exclusive it is and how well it fits the niche.

Personally if I join a big download site with hundreds of studios content that is designed for downloading...then yes it is a factor. However, as a consumer, if I join a site that is supposed to be exclusive then I damn sure don't expect to see it for free everywhere else.

That would make the consumer feel like a sucker.

I spent a lot of time and money out of my pocket to re-encode BY HAND every movie we have and re-upload all of them. And then I re-did that again as I tweaked through settings and read documentation and educated myself.

Seems to me that if presented correctly that can be shown as the positive that it is for my members and not a negative. Which would result in greater sales for the review site and would also discourage the people who want to download all of our content from joining in the first place.

For instance, I cater to the big tit guys on Claudia-Marie.Com I KNOW that niche inside and out. I know exactly what they are looking for, how to shoot it and how to present it. And most importantly how to SELL it. It's how her site got so damn big so quick.

Knowing that, why don't the review sites present it the same way? As in: Here is a site with damn near anything a big tit lover would enjoy. AND when you join your membership actually means something because you are part of an exclusive collection of people viewing content that is NOT on every tube and torrent.

That IS an honest statement. No need to bullshit the surfer. No need to make up stuff in the review. But it can be presented in a way that shows the value of our encrypted streaming as opposed to making it a negative. It really IS a positive to our true members. You know, the ones who rebill month after month.

We aren't a download site, we are an exclusive big tit site that should be reviewed as such in my opinion. But if certain of my affililates that run review sites just don't want to maximize sales with me...I can't do anything about it. I'll just keep raking in the type-ins and making 100% of the profit. :)

They are writing the review for the consumer, so of course they'd treat it as negative. It's of course not fair from the paysite's perspective, but it's how review sites are built. They're a double edged sword.

do you put "NO DOWNLOADING ALLOWED" in big red letters on the tour.

If you truly believe it not a negative from the prespective of the surfer (not cost you any sales) why not.

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:2 cents:

I know what you are trying to say gideongallery...but as usual it doesn't come across correctly

That would be marketing it NEGATIVELY.

Using the walmart analogy...Walmart doesn't advertise in big red letters: "WE HAVE CHEAP SHIT FOR SALE" Instead they present their products as affordable and good value for the money.

As I said previously...if it's a big DVD download site with dozens of major studios inside that is designed for download then yeah! Or if it's a site that does advertise to download as much as you want.

But if it's an exclusive site then the content needs to remain exclusive. We have the technology to allow our members to watch the movies faster than downloading them. I'm selling them a membership to a private club online. Not the rights to my content.

What I am doing makes their membership more valuable than it would be if all of the members area were available for free (like it was before I went this route) on every tube and torrent. And in the case of the tubes...they sure do seem to like to watch stuff streaming there for free. heh-heh So far 99.99999% of my members are more enamored with the girl and not so much about whether or not they can download our scenes.

I just wanted to drop in and give our feedback and answer some of the questions in this thread. There are a bunch of issues being discussed here and I am happy to answer any questions about our philosophy on them. However, in this post, I just want to address the main topic presented by MaDalton.

First of all I would like to state that we are all for content producers and providers to protect their content. We in no way support content piracy of any kind. We don?t? want your content out there for free either. We 100% support you.

Yes you are right, we do score sites that offer downloads slightly better than sites that are streaming only. However, the reduction in points is extremely small.

When we do the reviews, we try to evaluate the member?s area from a consumer perspective. The feedback we have gotten for our traffic and outside sources tell us that the majority of consumers want the ability to download the videos onto their computer and watch them easily and freely. Because of this, we will comment in the reviews about both the pros and cons of what download or streaming options the site offers.

Offering streaming only content as a means of loss prevention will only get you so far. The honest consumer is not going to try to figure out how to hack the files and download them. The dishonest consumer will and can still get your content. There are several programs on the market that will allow you to download flash and WMV streaming files. They just rip the content via the software right onto their computer. We just don?t look at streaming videos from a loss prevention point of view.

Our review criteria is an evolving process. As our users tastes change, so will our reviews. If down the road we feel that users prefer streaming only sites over download sites, you will see things change in that direction in our reviews.

If you ask your traffic (take a poll) if they like streaming flash videos, they almost all say no. If you change the words to "do you like streaming you tube videos", more say yes. Why, simply because they don't know what it is and the threat of no downloads bothers them.

But if you put an embedded video with a download link and a flash streaming movie up, that are the same and ask them to rate it. The flash stream kills the download, in rating, views, likes, uses, everything. The download... isn't even downloaded.

The real problems is "you assume" you know what the surfer wants.. when you have no idea yourself, just like them..

Exactly. Vegas Ken, what you are experiencing in my opinion is a failure in marketing. It's all about presentation.

You are presented to the surfer as a "Review Site" When the internet was young, we tgp's were presented as just "nice guys who want to share our porn"

But in the end we are all affiliates trying to make a sale. You CAN present it to your surfers in a way that is beneficial to them, to you, and to me. But you're not doing it. We are not a download site. And if you asked your surfers if they would rather shell out $34.99 for a site that everybody else can see for free OR if they would rather spend that money on something exclusive then as TheDoc said...the answers would be much different than the ones you are quoting now.

It's the same way that polls are skewed. You can't get the right answer it you're not asking the right questions. And you aren't going to make a sale if you don't present the site correctly and truthfully. And penalizing a site like ours for doing encrypted streaming only is not correct or truthful. The truth is it is to the BENEFIT of our REAL members. Not the fly by nights who join, download, and then chargeback. But the members who have been faithful members since the day we opened the doors.

As I said earlier...almost all of our members are in love with the girl. They LIKE being a member. They support her and want to do things for her. It's a different ballgame than the big generic sites out there and should be treated as such.

your still hiding the fact that it is streaming only, in fact you don't even mention that streamed.


"Jack Van Patrick decides to have some fun and hires Claudia-Marie for a private show. After the lap dancing is over the REAL fun begins. Seems Jack got aroused while Claudia-Marie was grinding her round ass in his lap and now she wants to see if his cock is really as big as it felt through his jeans."

why not say "streamed to your computer in blab blab "
whatever positive way you want to say it.

Your walmart example is not really applicable because unlike walmart who makes the point with a positive spin you are completely hiding the fact that it is streaming only until AFTER the join happens.

IF you offered 100% money back guarrentee if you were not satisfied with the streaming experience, then you could argue the point you are making.

Because you would actually have numbers (those that took advantage of the 100% money back guarrentee) vs those who simple accept it because it the only offer they have.

Hey Robbie,

Are your streaming videos secured/encrypted in some way, so they cannot be downloaded, or are you just assuming that streaming the videos will inherently cut down on stolen content?

If a visitor can record and save the streaming scene as it plays, then theives will steal and trade clips regardless.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for making it more difficult for sure.

What? This makes zero logic.. That block of text should never say the word streaming in it and if it did, it would sound stupid. The word streaming is a marking word, and would clearly be seen when looking at the streaming trailers done in flash.

Fact is this.. What surfers 'SEE' on the outside of a site (the tour) is what they think they are getting. If you have 10 girls, all streaming and you don't say downloads. The member doesn't think he is getting 11 girls with downloads.

Members are 'allowed' to download videos normally, so they share them. When you stream them correctly, they don't need to download them. Being so, they don't copy and rip them for download and then share them. They just assume this is how it should be.

Members don't join to steal your porn, they join to watch it. A thief in the mix isn't going to get you across all the tubes and torrents, but letting your members just openly download everything, will.

You speak from ignorance as usual. I DO give anyone their money back no questions asked.

I don't WANT anybody being a member of our site that doesn't want to be. Fuck them. We have over 2,000 members right now and I don't need ANY of them to be unhappy.

So please don't try to speak for me or my business as you don't have a fucking clue.

As far as putting "STREAMING ONLY" on the site...how many times do I have to keep telling you that we are NOT a big generic site. We are a solo girl site with exclusive content for big tit lovers who are discriminating in their tastes. They could give 2 shits about whether the site has downloads or not. They are more interested in being able to communicate with Claudia-Marie and be a member of our "family"

Look gideongallery...I don't want to go round and round with you. I know you are convinced that people should have the absolute rights to take anything they want from me for free. I get it. I can't change your mind and you can't change mine.

But when it comes to the entertainment business? Nigga please! I've been an entertainer all my life and if anybody knows what to give an audience it's me. So please stick to the threads where you can argue faux law and leave this ONE topic between people who are actually IN the adult business.

Thanks

Yes sir. I bought Adobe Flash Server and installed in on my server and we stream them encrypted. I got tired of arguing about tubes and torrents and put my money and time where my mouth is.

I don't see that streaming solves the problem. It took me 5 minutes to find a capture program and 5 minutes more to find a converter flash to avi or whatever.

My gribe with the review sites is they have one busines model in their heads and that is quantity. If you don't update or have tons of material you get lower score, you're then buried in their site somewhere and get zero traffic. They push a race to the bottom in quantity over anything creative.

Of course they don't have to know anything to start a review site.

It is surprising that it is the same sites on all the review sites that get the exposure. Do they really all like the same rather dull stuff?

Another surprising thing is that they very rarely talk about the girls. Whether they like them or not... I find a lot of websites have jsut plain awful looking woman but neevr once seen a review say it. Maybe they are all blind

On my next site I was planning to do this :) Regular subscription would be streaming, and if you wanted to download you had to pay per clip like clips4sale.

so why complain about a negative review, telling people your streaming only, saying it as a negative on a review site , when the members "could give 2 shits about wheather the site has downloads or not" and are "more interested in being able to communicate with Claudia-Marie" would never be turned away by the negative review anyway.

The only people who would be turned away are people who want to download the content, and since you would be giving those members 100% no questions asked refund anyway, the negative review is not costing you a dime.

Yes, you're talking about .flv's and just regular old streaming. I went with encrypted streaming. And the only way they are gonna get that is with a screen recorder and then it's gonna be bad quality. And when and if that happens and something is put on a tube or torrent...I follow that up with the "2" of my "1-2 punch" removeyourcontent.com They dmca my UNAPPROVED stuff down when and if it gets out there. Now I can release promotional vids to tubes on my terms and for the benefit of both the tube owner (as an affiliate) and myself and still keep my members part of an exclusive family.

Damn....I asked you to please stay out of this. We have NEVER gotten a negative review. What was said was that once I went this route, the review sites lowered our score. I think it is self defeating on their part for THEIR sales to us to do so. I put in work and time to do something that makes our members area MORE valuable to it's members. And the review sites are not acknowleding it and are instead presenting it in an unfavorable light. gideon...I have watched your posts and have stayed away. I GREATLY disagree with EVERYTHING you say. I am asking you very nicely to please stay out of this conversation. I'd like it to have some kind of benefit for people who make a living in adult and not be a pissing contest between you and I.

The problem is, surfers "think" they want downloads because that is all they know. The truth is when you introduce flash streams, the 'care, need or want' for downloads goes away.

When review sites knock you for that, it creates an opinion about the product before they try it. A product they may very well like but won't try because of an opinion.

And now for logic, refunds cost programs money!

its the surfer that makes it a neg point. I would think they are writing it by the feedback given to them from the customers.

I see, that does sound as if it works. Sadly I don't think it would work for us as we want to deliver very high quality and that would not be streamable...

I love "streaming" giz all over a nice pair of big natural titties. I also love the same pair of tits rubbing "down" my shaft just before I drop my "load". Hmmm, tough call... how much for both?

Check out this site: http://www.hulu.com/

Exact same technology we use. h264 mpegs Different kind of compression and PERFECT for high def streaming. Watched any Hollywood major motion picture trailers online lately? Same thing. It IS something that you can use. Some of our movies are 30 minutes long and over half a gig in size and they start streaming within 2 to 3 seconds. And then you can move the cursor on the timeline ANYWHERE in the movie and it will begin streaming from there instantly. No need to wait for a download or buffering. Add that to a CDN (which I currently do not use because I'm rather small compared to some of the bigger sites) and you have a perfect streaming solution.

Rick, I think I can get you hooked up for the cost of a couple of jaegerbombs on a Friday night :1orglaugh

QFT :thumbsup

I would bet that half or more surfers think that when they watch a movie on youtube, they're "downloading" it.
I've heard people talk about "downloading" stuff off of a CD to their computer. It's not a good word to use when asking people what they want from a porn site, that's for sure.

Again, I think offering videos with DRM similar to what Itunes does is the way to go. Surfer can keep the movie and watch it even after his membership expires....but it will only work on "X" number of devices....so that it can't be shared with the masses via tubes or torrents. :2 cents:

Two comments...

1. Bandwidth and encoding is to the point where streaming is almost a "must" for any pay-site. Streaming if done well, can add a lot of value to their site.

2. The point of downloads is to offer "higher" quality videos than what reliable streaming can provide. That's its primary benefit. The other benefit is the ability to play it back from any media/computer at any later date, blow it up full screen, with no internet connection or membership required.

Both have its positives and slightly different purpose. Not providing a solid method of delivering both can be taken as a negative to some. Protecting your content (like Robbie has chosen) is perfectly valid. But you can't knock review sites for pointing out the "lack" of options that most users normally expect when shelling out the plastic.

Agreed, but like I stated in my post above....if we offered videos that could be downloaded and played on your computer forever, and could even be transferred to a few other devices you own (laptop, ipod, iphone, etc), but there was a limit to how many times you could copy it....you would call that DRM and put it in big red letters on the review.

When I buy a song from Itunes for 99 cents....it's mine to keep forever, but whenever I copy it to another device, it prompts me for my user/pass again and lets me know how many more times I can copy it before I have to buy it again (usually 5 times)
This is more than fair, but if I did it with a porn site you would lower my score and put DRM in big red letters on my review.

I'm not knocking it. I'm saying that getting a lowered "score" and not one mention of how we are protecting the content and keeping the membership valuable to the MEMBERS isn't a good way for you to make sales. And believe me...I have watched the sales to some very big sites dwindle to nothing from my tgp's because their stuff is everywhere for free. I've done the affiliate game for close to 12 years and my instincts have always been on the money and more importantly made me a lot of money at everything I've touched in online adult. And I think you guys are missing the marketing aspect of this.

You're lowering scores for sites that CAN sell. And not mentioning anything at all about the benefits of the encrypted streaming. Yeah, if you want to say: "Cons: no downloads AND THEN SAY: Pros: Instantaneous YouTube-like high quality streaming and the site protects it's content from being stolen and presented for free therefore making your membership more valuable"

Then yeah. I would say that's good marketing. As it stands now it is presented as "No downloads" and as a complete negative with NO mention of the positive result or the much better presentation of the content.

I'm just saying, you're missing out on sales to sites that you should be making good money with and pushing sites that aren't gonna satisfy the consumer as much and are almost a generic blur.