Quote:
Originally Posted by crucifissio
Logic says that a site like orgasm.xxx, that supposedly gets 120 sign ups/day only from tube traffic, is not hard to make, it has mediocre quality girls, good camera but not great, average website, a super competitive/saturated niche like lesbians and teens. The whole site screams "nothing special" but it gets 120 sign ups per day just form tubes? No disrespect to the site owner, kudos to him, I have no website and I am nobody to judge just stating the obvious BUT:
why do tubes not get more support in this thread from program owners who are clearly capable of producing the same type of quality as orgasm.xxx?
|
The reason that sites like orgasms.xxx DaneJones Lesbea Casting.xxx FakeAgent do so well for Ruseful is because they were created specifically for promotion via the tubes. That means every single video that is uploaded to the tubes is the best possible representation of that site. And these sites are brand new, with the first site being launched in August '11 (Casting.xxx) and September (Orgasms.xxx) then the rest late Dec '11 (Lesbea) and mid Jan '12 for DaneJones and FakeAgent. Every tube specifically edited clip stands up to any scrutiny. They are over 8 minutes, mostly over 10 minutes, and they are all fulfilling clips with a beginning, middle and ending. Content is shot specifically with the tube edit in mind.
You say, this content is not hard to make, and I have written a guide on how to sell a membership to a user of a free tube below. It tells you exactly how Ruseful does it. So, you do really have everything at your disposal to do what Ruseful is doing with the sites, day in-day out.
Yes, I personally own all of the sites I talk about. I created the production company to make use of my knowledge gained from running YouPorn. I am now at PornTube, building another huge tube, doing it all over again.