Thank you for replying, will discuss your post part be part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
Your theory is wrong because nobody converts 1:1, even people looking to buy - with an actual need, don't always buy.
|
Never said it would. so no idea where you got it from. I'm talking about converting better than we do. Maybe from 1-500 to 1-400, retaining an average of 7 weeks to an average of 8.
Quote:
|
Quality is unique per site, project, product, etc... quality is in the eye of what the person wants or desires that is buying. Quality is not an equal standard set by you or anyone. Even the worst quality porn has value to some, and the best quality porn doesn't attract everyone.
|
Of course this is right, what is great to a guy who likes Glamor, is not to a guy who likes Amateur. No idea where you got this from, not from me. Even I know the site has to shape the ideas according to the niche/style. I've always said the same person shooting all the content for a site is limiting the viewers selection. Manwin is good in employing different shooters.
Quote:
|
What is adapt or die? It's changing and moving and never sitting still, moving with porn, as it moves throughout various technologies, systems, etc... it's in places you and me and others, will never think of, ever... but it's waiting for us to find and monetize it either way. This is the history of porn, from as far back as history can track it, it has moved.... always!
|
Of course that's adapting. So why hasn't online porn adapted? We still sell the same product we sold 13 years ago. All that's changed is resolution and size. Basically we haven't adapted anything but the mode of delivery and now losing customers because of the lack of adapting to the fact recorded porn is now every where for free. Online porn can deliver so much more than recorded porn. Some sites offer live porn. I'm adapting that model to the paysite model.
Quote:
|
So, the "issue" I see with your logic is simple, you're focused on the 'internet porn on a pc', at that "free" internet porn on the pc. That's one bubble, one thing... one tinny ass, micro revenue stream, within a technology and is two-steps down within the system.
|
This is a benefit not a disadvantage. Because the Internet mode of delivery is the only one that can use the idea and therefore puts it ahead in this area. Recorded porn can't, mobile porn can but the cost to the viewer is going to make it ineffective. You see it as a disadvantage for online porn, no idea why.
Insult again.
Quote:
|
If you want your ratios back, how about you start by not looking in the big pile of free loaders..... Huh? Logical eh?
|
It will attract those paying on sites without live porn as well as free loaders. It's an added benefit for anyone, buyers on other sites and maybe some ex buyers who gave up as recorded porn is available everywhere for free.
Quote:
|
Btw, your ideas on content is flat wrong. You think all this crazy shit has to be done with content, all these rules... fact is, you have no idea what is good or bad in porn, because you are not everyone in the world. You telling these producers what they're doing right and wrong, is so laughable... You have no idea what "members" want.. I know sites that break every single rule you say that retain a 100x better than the sites you think are good. Oh and cross 'technology' wise, people don't give a shit... they just want the damn porn!
|
More insults. With no proof adapting those sites
wouldn't make the perform better. The people who just want the "dam porn" are catered for fine, Tubes, pirated, paysites with stacks of porn are everywhere. Why do you think that's the only thing everyone wants?
I'm telling people of something
some could add to their sites to make them better. The situation is most simply couldn't afford it. A site with 1,000 would need to increase sign ups and retention by so much it's out of their reach. Unless they trim it back a lot. A girl 40 hours a week is going to cost from around $400 a week. $1600 a month. At $10 profit a sign up that's 160 sign ups, increase of 16%, will it perform that well? sites with 10,000 members only need an increase of 1.6%.
Which is an added benefit for those who can afford it. It keeps out the little man.
Quote:
|
I'm not cutting you down or being ass, but no bullshit - you have no idea wtf is going on in this Industry. You're not in it, accept the facts, why would you know this stuff? Other than people have been telling you it for like 2 years and you just ignore it.
|
More insults. As you reached the wrong conclusions about what I'm posting, you don't have the right to say I have no idea.
The shame is people don't tell me what it's like today, except those who tell everyone it's getting tougher. And there's a lot who tell that.
You think inside the box all the time. If people only want the porn, then they can get it for free. And are doing so in increasing numbers.
Thank you for answering it's clear you're reading my posts wrongly. This is in no way going to increase ratios to 1-1, it's wrong to assume that. In fact I have said it's out of the reach of most sites and only for the elite. Maybe I'm dreaming there's an elite who could afford it. How many sites have a 10,000 recurring membership? The way so many talk I would of thought quite a few.
It's so obvious that principle ideas have to be adapted to each individual site, not right for every surfer or every site could afford it. I felt I didn't need to say it. I was wrong.
Thank you for replying.