Should 3rd Party Processors Enforce 'Quality Control'?
 

I just read a post in another thread by a guy selling off a teen paysite and it relates to something else I saw this week. This paysite for sale according to Reak is nothing more than a pretty tour with hosted galleries upselling inside.

A few days ago I had the ...... uh ...... priviledge ... of seeing the members area of a single model amateur paysite billing at over 20 bucks a month - i think I counted 9 photosets - that's it - no other content - 9 measly photosets.

I know customer satisfaction isn't the only factor when it comes to
chargebacks but sites like these are just no fucking good for the industry.

Both sites are processed by CCBILL. Do you think that third party billers should be doing some quality control for value before processing for each site?

your thoughts..........

Look here are the facts (facts that most rather not hear)

Surfers are becoming smarter they know canceling a membership doesnt mean refund and they know how to chargeback.

In a year from now I bet there will be over tons of merchants that wont be able to accept any CC's anymore.

The BS sites will be gone if not for billers getting rid of them it will be Visa Master.

Yes.

From your keyboard, to God's eyes! :)

I am shocked at some of the members areas that people have. ESPECIALLY revshare programs. I will not send traffic to many rev share programs, and the ones I do better have great members areas, and work hard in retention.

Mutt, I think you will see some quality control come out - the processers will be forced to do it soon.

Fuck yes.

the question is shouldn't 3rd party processors who hold the future of alot of small businessmen in their hands, many who produce a quality product through hard work and investment, be proactive?

KimmyKim says chargeback problems have little to do with 'customer satisfaction' issues. Maybe she is right. But I bet that the billers have never done a thorough study relating chargebacks to the quality of the members area. Not hard to do - rank sites on a 1-10 scale - it ain't rocket science - we all know what is a high quality site, an average site and a pathetic excuse for a site.

I think quality control by third party processors should be mandatory. After all, by doing the billing for sites they are affiliating themselves to those sites, and if the sites rip people off, they are partly responsible (I believe even legally so).


Aside from that, though, webmasters should have some common sense. For a mere 5k you can set up a half-decent members area, if you just buy all the sobe vids and some content blowouts. If you can't afford that, you shouldn't be starting a paysite :2 cents:

MikeAI operates, hell he invented, the single model amateur site scene. I do some stuff with PureCash so I have been through his members areas recently as a few days ago - there are well over 100 individual photosets of the girl in his members areas - plus a bunch of videos - plus additional third party content.


A site doesn't have to start off with 100 photosets but 25-30 should be the bare minimum. Value of a photoset is $50-150 - no processor should be processing for a site with less than $5000 invested in the site. Name me one other business where any jerkoff can get into business for less than $5000.

Are you all going to trust your business to someone a 3rd party biller hired to rank a site from 1 to 10? Are you also going to pay extra to these 3rd party billers for the extra employees they are going to have to hire to check and recheck sites?

What might be quality to one person might be disgusting and non-quality to another. You get some prude chick or dude going that your site is a 3 because of some insane reason in that persons head.

anybody with an I.Q. over a grapefruit's can look at a paysite and grade it for this purpose - it's not the freakin Academy Awards - it's not about personal taste either - I hate old lady and fatso porn but I can judge a paysite good, average or pathetic without being into the niche. as far as money goes - it takes 5 minutes max for a minimum wage employee to check out a site and weed out the ripoff ones that can do nothing but disappoint the customer and potentially cause him to chargeback or reticent to join another site.

they will save money and will be able to layoff 50% of their customer service staff

Some of the AVS sites used to have "minimum" rules before you could use their service. You have to have at least 100 pics or 10 videos or something.

Maybe CCBill and the other should at least start with something simple like that.

You can't charge $49 a month plus all the hidden charges unless you have at least 25 pictures and 5 videos?

Maybe the content providers should start lobbying for those kind of rules. :)

I signed up for a popular single girl teen site the other day

I think there was 4-5 really boring movies and like 10-20 sets. I had a better time looking at the hosted galleries than at the members area

I'm sure it would help conversions if these sites didn't exist

the dead globill had minimum rules about content. Of course having decent amount of crap content doesnt mean a lot of things, but compared to 25 photosets and 12 movies you can find now it's a step.

I'm sure someone would immediatly launch a really cheap "CCBILL minimum" plugin, but at least it would mean that more paysites had a lot of content, even if a lot of it sucked. :)

Would you people still support the idea if there was an annual "auditing" fee, like the recently added CC fee?

No.

I think 3rd parties should mind their own business. That's like them telling you how run your business. If that started, things could end up being monitored too tight and it already takes too long to get a response from these companies and Visa even further. Were lucky we actually get paid on time.

If Visa and the other banking institutions want to evaluate YOUR business, that may be another story, but only under certain circumstances should that be. High charge-back ratios, etc.

Even then, it may not be fair.

Being registered with Visa enables them to monitor our accounts a little more closely now. If they want more control (and I'm sure they will in the very near near future) they will make it so.

I'm not saying there isn't people giving us a bad name with no or crap content, but that should reflect on their chargebacks and Visa should terminate accordingly.

Mutt --- what if they told you that we only want use to you a Canon 12MP camera (model # xxx) for now on because it's the best?

It's not the best metaphor but I think you get my point.

its their business for them to stay in business

but if you like it or not the biller will either get rid of the site or visa will get rid of that merchant all together.

unfortunatly, this is the sad truth

I'm going to have to disagree. I just signed up with CCBill. I own a adult game site (not a casino site). I was denied at first because alot of people associate a game site to casinos. Especielly since I have strip poker and strip blackjack. It doesn't take much brains to see that a strip poker game or strip blackjack game is not a casino site. Yet, the person at CCBill thought my site was a casino site. This is the same person that would rate sites, if 3rd party billers did that. I had to email that person back explaining that strip poker and strip black jack games are adult games and not casino games.

I'm just saying your putting your business into someone elses hands when you want them to monitor yours and other peoples sites. Email 10 people you know (or better yet, don't know). Ask them to rate your site from 1 to 10. Tell them to be honest. Your going to get ranges from 3 to 10 probably.

I do agree that it's in everybody's interests for them to stay in business and 3rd parties do that already by doing customer service and good scrubbing. However, if we allow them too much control, one day it could get used in the wrong way or used to their advantage.


Note: More to their advantage then them already making a ton of money on the percentages they charge us AND the interest they make from our money that we never see a penny of. (Reserves)

perfectiongirls site?

:thumbsup

to be fair, there are now 11 whole photosets - must have been a big update!

Very good.. the site is 1 week old. Nice having one of your boys pose as a model on aol to scam a user pass.. right JJ?

wtf does a site being new have to do with the price of tea in China?

when I go to a new restaurant and order a meal they serve me a meal, they don't go 'Here's an appetizer we've only been open a few weeks'. And charge for a price of a full meal.

i don't think that third party billers should be able to grade sites - not at all! that brings opinion into the arena. i have talked to people working as reps for all the major billers that still have no clue about what we're doing.

that being said, i do think there should be a minimum number of pics sets and a minimum amount of minutes of video in a paysite. that is not open to interpretation and will protect everybody.

on the other hand, when myfirstsexteacher started, they only had 5 sets of pics and videos, but they also gave access to all their other sites. believe it or not, the members retained just fine. this would have to be figured in.

lol

I do also and he is right It does need more content and its going to get it. We lauched the site to hav eit up a week before internext. The model is in Florida and we are in Michigan. She coming to Inernext and we are shooting a ton.. End of story.

With the new charge back rules and penalties there is going to be a big shake up. Also as people have pointed out the surfer is getting more savvy.

No longer can sites exist with crap content and not much of it, the days when members were all newbies are over. The guy will have been a member of a site before and will know what to expect.

If the 3rd party processors do not start doing it they will be in trouble and yes I hear that they have to know what they are doing but it has to happen.

Because you can bet your shirt a lot of paysite owners will have to be forced to toe the line. Look at perfectiongirls reply. He actually thinks a site being new makes a difference. Not to someone who just paid $30. :ak47:

Hey Charly... read my post above yours. Our Visa charge back percentage is .3% for the year.. This is a one site situation.. as my post stated above. :)

How can anybody open a site with 11 image sets?

This is a great advert for our industry!!

I bet you don't ofer a trial on your tours?
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Mutt,

I think the only reason you see ccbill on these sites is their ease of setup and their partnership software..

No way you can enforce quality control, it doesnt matter now, every company is responsible for their visa accounts, not like before when it was processor.

Who will be allowed to say it's worth or not? No, never a processor should have to made any descission for this. Next time they should tell the shop managers at Tiffany the prices are to high for there stuff? It's bullshit

Finally a sensible post in a sea of stupid.

Interesting read... However, from a Visa standpoint... there are more scammers in adult than in any other business. Just in the last year alone I cannot count how many threads there are about how people are scamming... I think the last was the Paris hilton and the 200.00 sign ups... if that was true...

Just like with everything else in life... a few people fuck it up for the rest of us. So, if one industry is known for cheating customers and are known to have a large chargeback ratio... then you cannot blame them for wanting to cover their ass and not lose money.

Put yourself in their position... :2 cents:

PS - We, can take control... We should police our own industry so others don't have to put their nose in our business. If you know someone is a scammer... why support them? Out them everywhere you can, do everything in your power to help shut them down so these idiots do not fuck things up even further.

I just found one that offered just 5 sets - and no indication of how often they update.

And I've seen several others run by people who advertise on this board where there is minimal content.

Billing companies don't have to decide if it's worth it or not - if they want to 'protect' themselves all they have to do is to set a minimum content level that you have to achieve before they will bill for you.

Some of the members areas I've been seeing lately make me want to puke thinking they charge $20 - $45/month for memberships. There are a few programs with impressive members areas and they retain as a result, but most programs start up and don't have the money for a pot to piss in, so they just hope they'll make bank with tons of affiliates sending hits to their pretty tours and shit backends... We really do need quality control on some level!

Who says opinion needs to be a factor in grading sites?

For every $1 you are going to charge, there has to be X number of photosets with X number of photos in each set for it to count.

If that policy was put into place, most paysites would go out of business like they deserve to.


I don't know why everyone is making a big deal about this anyway. This sort of thing should be expected in an industry with SO MANY people who should be flipping burgers as their primary income source, and would be if it wasn't for the internet. That applies to some of the well-known names too.

This problem will never go away until something hinders these losers ability to do business online.