Do tube sites get you sales? - Page 4 - GoFuckYourself.com

Paul Markham · 05-07-2011, 01:44 AM

Adam.

Someone posted on another board these stats.

Quote:

I've seen 1:1600 on good days -but it's usually around 1:3800-4500 on mine.

I think he's talking clicks on a link. Even if he's not a million views on a video would see 38 sales.

Maybe he's no good. I'm sure many will come in and post they can do 1-10 on their tube.

bjlover · 05-07-2011, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Well considering I'm the longest serving person in porn and one of the most successful, being dumb hasn't held me back.

I guess your definition of being successful is being broke, with no business and with no life outside webmaster forums.

You have zero life apart from forums, you post from morning till night the same old shit all day

You cant accept that you didn't make money and now you are so bitter you do NOTHING at all apart from post all day every day on adult forums.

If it wasn't so fucking tragic and sad it would be funny.

You REALLY need to move on with your life. Watching you having a serious mental breakdown was funny for about a year, now it is seriously tragic.

Do you seriously have nothing else in your life? Can't you find a hobby or anything to do in your so called retirement. You are so very bitter and sad I feel sorry for you.

DamianJ · 05-07-2011, 02:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The word imagine means imagine. It obviously flew over your head what it was meant to mean.

Lol. You funny old man.

You said "imagine if people stopped giving away content" Right? Which isn't going to happen. Still with me? Cool.

I then used a technique called mirroring to obviously mock you for YET ANOTHER pathetic point and idea you made, viz:

"imagine is watching porn became mandatory".

You see, I took your ridiculous statement, and made another ridiculous statement 'mirroring' your mental POV.

This is how I mock you.

Hope you're up to speed now. I know you get tired posting your constant lies, so I took the time to break it down for you. No need to thank me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

SNIP nonsense about wanking

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The
Yes I did. Sarcasm also seems to be beyond you.

Yes, Clearly, I had no idea you didn't realise! FFS Paul, it's MIRRORING again. You see, you said something sarcastic, and I mirrored you. Sigh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The
You obviously have no clue how GFY works. Putting someone on Ignore is as easy as taking someone off ignore.

Why did you make a post lying about putting people on ignore, then reply to EVERYONE you claimed was on your ignore list within a few hours?

Why do you feel the need to lie constantly? Is it cos Eva is out washing up now? Is she not there to tell you to stop lying?

If you want to ignore someone, just do it. But to start a thread with more lies just makes you look like, well, a liar.

Step away from the PC.

Why not take your puppy to the local playground? Sure you'll get lots of attention.

DamianJ · 05-07-2011, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jakez

You said at one time the UK was selling printed porn to 2% of it's population.

That was another of his huge lies. When it comes to facts and figures, Paul just pulls them out of his arse. He never provides a single citation. Ever.

Jakez · 05-07-2011, 03:49 AM

Another pic on imgur for you Paul, just another day of ads on tubes with long videos

Jack Sparrow · 05-07-2011, 03:56 AM

7 sales today from putting 2 videos on 2 big tubes.
Aint much right? Nope, its for the little leaguers.

But guess what, it takes me 10 minutes a day to do this. Count those 7 sales x 30 a month x 12 a year. And its still not getting me rich right. But it sure as hell isnt hurting my bank account either.

And im not talking about paying for adspace. Im not throwing up just ANY video. Im doing it my way, and my way works for me. Its something that has been finetuned and tweaked, and im NOT going to spill the beans on how to do this properly.

But if you think a tube with a lot of free porn cant get you any sales, boy you are wrong.

Attracting millions of horney flies with free shit, and some will stick. This isnt the 90's but again: It sure as hell aint hurting my bankaccount, nor does it take much time.

Nathan · 05-07-2011, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Now add cable. Before the Internet cable was available in most of the developed world and Adult Channels were wide spread. In the UK Richard Clive Desmond made millions out of porn, most of it from owning Television X and Red Hot TV, he sold off his print porn empire after the Internet devastated printed porn. He seems to have survived.

Richard Desmond's networth is 950m because of his mainstream business and not because of Television X and Red Hot TV!

So why compare to him?!

gideongallery · 05-07-2011, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Pornhub is an affiliate of mine. I put up a bunch of vids on Pornhub of Claudia Marie. They were all watermarked AND the marketing "genius" clowns at Pornhub put up a single text link to the site with their affiliate code.

I have since pulled the vids back down after I proved my point.

The vids had almost 5 MILLION views. Here is pornhubs stats to claudia-marie.com:
15279 8 1:1909 $226.95

That is 15,279 actual people clicking the text link out of 5 million people watching the vids. This is over an 8 month period by the way.

8 sales and $226.95 is what they made over 8 months and 5 million views of the vids. What a fucking joke. And that is the biggest and "best" tube site in the world. lol

An average affiliate with a tiny blog getting 1,000 hits a day can do better than that in a week as far as sales are concerned.

the problem with your number isnt a problem with the traffic it a problem with your content

you basically trying to sell tube traffic with tgp methods

the real secret is designing a process that actually matches the true benefit of the tube

if you do that your conversion ratios are 1:113 or better

Paul Markham · 05-07-2011, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

Richard Desmond's networth is 950m because of his mainstream business and not because of Television X and Red Hot TV!

So why compare to him?!

Because like most porn moguls he made enough money from porn to move on into other areas. With all his money, he still keeps the adult cable part.

Shows the money that used to be made and the good businessman he and some others are. I'm sure there will be one or two who will do the same from porn. But who will make £950 ($1.5 billion). Do you see anyone in online porn only becoming a billionaire? Been more than one from a start in porn.

Richard Desmond's porn empire was always a small part of his publishing business. But extremely profitable.

Jack Sparrow I never said Tubes don't make sales, I never said it wasn't easy to do. What I say and will always say is those 7 sales could of been 70 sales. Without the tons of free porn availble for years the 7 would of been far higher.

As Damian says it's too late now. If there is a solution it lies in the product we sell. It has to really compete with what's available for free. The problem isn't creating the product. The problem is affording it. With the massive cost today of traffic, very little is left for the product.

Your up a stream without a paddle.

Well done, you made $105 on a 50% rev share. till $3150 a month is goint to pay the rent. Now you can tell us how you get $50 a sign up and prove to us the cost of traffic is too expensive.

Be honest, could you afford to host those films on your own servers?

Agent 488 · 05-07-2011, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Because like most porn moguls he made enough money from porn to move on into other areas. With all his money, he still keeps the adult cable part.

Shows the money that used to be made and the good businessman he and some others are. I'm sure there will be one or two who will do the same from porn. But who will make £950 ($1.5 billion). Do you see anyone in online porn only becoming a billionaire? Been more than one from a start in porn.

Richard Desmond's porn empire was always a small part of his publishing business. But extremely profitable.

Jack Sparrow I never said Tubes don't make sales, I never said it wasn't easy to do. What I say and will always say is those 7 sales could of been 70 sales. Without the tons of free porn availble for years the 7 would of been far higher.

As Damian says it's too late now. If there is a solution it lies in the product we sell. It has to really compete with what's available for free. The problem isn't creating the product. The problem is affording it. With the massive cost today of traffic, very little is left for the product.

Your up a stream without a paddle.

Well done, you made $105 on a 50% rev share. till $3150 a month is goint to pay the rent. Now you can tell us how you get $50 a sign up and prove to us the cost of traffic is too expensive.

Be honest, could you afford to host those films on your own servers?

jack had tubes of his own, so yes.

Nathan · 05-07-2011, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Because like most porn moguls he made enough money from porn to move on into other areas. With all his money, he still keeps the adult cable part.

Shows the money that used to be made and the good businessman he and some others are. I'm sure there will be one or two who will do the same from porn. But who will make £950 ($1.5 billion). Do you see anyone in online porn only becoming a billionaire? Been more than one from a start in porn.

Richard Desmond's porn empire was always a small part of his publishing business. But extremely profitable.

Jack Sparrow I never said Tubes don't make sales, I never said it wasn't easy to do. What I say and will always say is those 7 sales could of been 70 sales. Without the tons of free porn availble for years the 7 would of been far higher.

As Damian says it's too late now. If there is a solution it lies in the product we sell. It has to really compete with what's available for free. The problem isn't creating the product. The problem is affording it. With the massive cost today of traffic, very little is left for the product.

Your up a stream without a paddle.

Well done, you made $105 on a 50% rev share. till $3150 a month is goint to pay the rent. Now you can tell us how you get $50 a sign up and prove to us the cost of traffic is too expensive.

Be honest, could you afford to host those films on your own servers?

Would love to know how they calc his "net worth"... most of it will be the estimated value of Northern & Shell.Judging from their 2009 financials published on their webpage, 8.5 million pounds in 2009 and 41 million in 2008. 2010 sadly not available yet. 13.7m pounds operating profit in 2009, 42m in 2008. Let's assume it got back to 2008 levels in 2010 (with channel5 and such added)... Then his networth is based on around 25 years of Northern & Shell operating profit...

If that's the case, yes, trust me, there is billionaire's in online porn net worth wise using those calculations.

Robbie · 05-07-2011, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

If there is a solution it lies in the product we sell. It has to really compete with what's available for free. The problem isn't creating the product. The problem is affording it. With the massive cost today of traffic, very little is left for the product.

Paul are you saying that more money needs to be spent to shoot content for the paysite? To day in and day out create porn that costs a lot of money to produce with lavish sets, etc.? Or hiring old school videographers to come out and bring in "real" film cameras and shoot for a lot of money?

Problem: As soon as it goes up on the site...within an hour it is stolen and then the new expensive porn is now "free" as well.

My approach has been to protect my content to the best of my ability. So far the protected stream (similar to what borked wrote about with a few twists of my own) has not been broken to be downloaded. (I do give them a small resolution version to download). And whenever we find a copy of the small rez one or an older vid that I had up that was downloadable we have RemoveYourContent dmca it down.

That way I am keeping my content's value to our members. Their membership actually means something...plus the fact that the inside of the members area is similar to a social network where they have a wall to post on and private message Claudia Marie and lots more ways to PERSONALLY interact with her.

THAT is what I feel makes a membership to her site have value for her fans. Much more so than just stealing the recorded videos and pictures or viewing them on pirate tubes like pornhub.

What is your solution to the fact that all this new content being shot by the "masters" that will cost a fortune to produce will almost instantly be worthless because it will be stolen and uploaded to a thousand torrents, a thousand file share sites, and a thousand Manwin tube sites?

My solution is plain and clear: Protect your content and then give the members personal interaction with the star.
But sites like Brazzers can not do that. They hire girls to shoot a scene (just like you just did for them) and then that girl isn't going to be there in the members area to interact with the customers.

So what value does a scene shot for a lot of money have in these circumstances?
None.
Not until PIRACY is under control.

I would strongly advise all serious paysite owners in this thread to think about what I'm saying. I've seen it with my own eyes. And if it didn't work...I wouldn't do it, I'd find something else that did work. No theories. No guessing. Just plain out this is the only way to get sales going again for your site and to make a membership to your site have value.

Your customers do NOT like to find out that the membership they pay for is useless because everyone else in the world is watching them for free...and that would include any content shot by Paul or any of the names he dropped in this thread.

DamianJ · 05-08-2011, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I do give them a small resolution version to download). And whenever we find a copy of the small rez one or an older vid that I had up that was downloadable we have RemoveYourContent dmca it down.

20 seconds searching

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3611338

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4070...Computer_Crash

http://www.girlscanner.com/naughtyam...ndshotmom.html

http://www.hotfileporn.org/search/sh...-marie-torrent

http://torrentz.eu/164cd90543aac4610...5db995ea2accd4

How much do you pay them to not remove the very small amount of your content that is online?

I wish I could have a client where I say I will do marketing, not do the marketing and still get paid. They have a sweet gig.

Roald · 05-08-2011, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

20 seconds searching

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3611338

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4070...Computer_Crash

http://www.girlscanner.com/naughtyam...ndshotmom.html

http://www.hotfileporn.org/search/sh...-marie-torrent

http://torrentz.eu/164cd90543aac4610...5db995ea2accd4

How much do you pay them to not remove the very small amount of your content that is online?

I wish I could have a client where I say I will do marketing, not do the marketing and still get paid. They have a sweet gig.

In Robbies defence, thats almost all NaughtyAmerica content. Not his own ;)

DamianJ · 05-08-2011, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

In Robbies defence, thats almost all NaughtyAmerica content. Not his own ;)

Fuck you dutchy.

;)

Seriously though, I just did a 20 second search on her name - just like a surfer would - and found all that content. So no need to join. Especially when I see the quality of the content. Probably having that out there does more harm than if he leaked the decent HD stuff he's shooting today.

Agent 488 · 05-08-2011, 02:06 AM

the only time i bought any intellectual property aside from a book in the last ten years was when i was unable to find a torrent or download somewhere.

Jack Sparrow · 05-08-2011, 03:05 AM

Paul you live in an "if" and "couldve been" world.
Wake up and smell the pussy, "your" world isnt coming back.

End of story.

/close thread.

DVTimes · 05-08-2011, 03:20 AM

I do not understand why porn firms do not sue tube sites and other sites.

the music and film biz would sue for millions.

what do porn firms do? send them and email saying can you please remove or your being bad email. i bet tube sites get scared to get those emails. only to pull the clip, then have it uploaded a few days later again.

If I had known how little porn firms deal with stolen content, i wish i had simply stolen all the content from everyones sites years ago and set up a big site with it all.

And what do firms now do? volentry post there content to tube sites. Its like taking all your goods down to the burglers home as that way it saves the burgler breaking into your house.

DVTimes · 05-08-2011, 03:37 AM

Burning Angel has jumped on to the litigation bandwagon with its first porn BitTorrent suit against users who allegedly have pirated its movies.

Burning Angel's porn BitTorrent suit at federal court in Chicago was one of seven filed nationwide on Wednesday. Both Hard Drive Productions and Corbin Fisher filed two suits a piece, with MCGIP and First Time Videos each filing single claims against scores of pirates.

So far, adult entertainment companies in the past year have waged hundreds of suits against thousands of defendants. Many claims have been paid out, attorneys say.

Burning Angel, according to its suit against 22 individuals for allegedly pirating "L.A. Pink," is considered a premier name within the alt-porn niche.

In fact, Joanna Angel, the website’s namesake model, was named in 2011 by CNBC as one of the 12 most popular stars in porn.

But substantially all of the works ever produced by Angel and her company can be pirated via the BitTorrent protocol, the suit says.

Angel told XBIZ on Thursday that her company has faced the scourge of piracy in a big way because she considers Burning Angel as still a small business.

"Piracy has affected our entire industry," she says, "but in our case we are a small company, and we would have been a bigger company if piracy weren't so rampant. We've plateaued but are still trudging through."

Angel says the only way the adult entertainment industry can succeed with free porn a click away is if the industry truly coalesces against piracy.

"Piracy can't be battled by just one person, it should be done as a whole," she says.

All seven suits seek court approval to identify John Doe defendants via subpoenas through their Internet service providers.

http://www.xbiz.com/news/133687

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

Would love to know how they calc his "net worth"... most of it will be the estimated value of Northern & Shell.Judging from their 2009 financials published on their webpage, 8.5 million pounds in 2009 and 41 million in 2008. 2010 sadly not available yet. 13.7m pounds operating profit in 2009, 42m in 2008. Let's assume it got back to 2008 levels in 2010 (with channel5 and such added)... Then his networth is based on around 25 years of Northern & Shell operating profit...

If that's the case, yes, trust me, there is billionaire's in online porn net worth wise using those calculations.

I have no idea how they calculate his Net worth. Just quoting what was written. Maybe you would like to find some more online porn people with quoted figures of over $500 million. Made from porn and other things.

They might of included of included Nothern & Shell Towers.

It over looks the Thames and situated in one of the most expensive location in the UK, if not the world. Docklands, London. He doesn't rent a few floors here. And I bet he knows how many toilets are on the floors he visits.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3479581.stm

Quote:

His personal wealth is estimated at around £550m according to the Evening Standard's list of the 100 richest Londoners, though some estimates put it even higher.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Paul are you saying that more money needs to be spent to shoot content for the paysite? To day in and day out create porn that costs a lot of money to produce with lavish sets, etc.? Or hiring old school videographers to come out and bring in "real" film cameras and shoot for a lot of money?

Don't be stupid. If that's insulting you, your post deserved it.

Yes more moeny needs to be spent inside the members area on those who pay for this merry go round than those outside the members area who don't pay. Radical thinking I know, but doesn't make it wrong.

The stupid part was lavish sets, old school shooters, real film and a lot more money.

It can be the same set, if the shooter is new or old is irrelevant. It's his skills that matter. Shooting on film is worse than stupid and if you knew the cost of film, you would know it was well beyond the means of 99.9% of porn companies. A lot of money is a thing that some will need. Mostly people need to spend more time on worrying about the quality of the porn and not the price and quantity.

Brazzers update with 3 scenes a day. Of which they already have 100s if not 1,000s of the same level. 2 scenes a day would cost no more and if their present shooters can't pull out 2 decent scenes on the money they got for 3. Then the door isn't locked. Get rid of them.

And it's not just Brazzers, other sites are exactly the same. shouting how many scenes they have, which in reality are all pretty much the same and dull after a while.

Quote:

Problem: As soon as it goes up on the site...within an hour it is stolen and then the new expensive porn is now "free" as well.

My approach has been to protect my content to the best of my ability. So far the protected stream (similar to what borked wrote about with a few twists of my own) has not been broken to be downloaded. (I do give them a small resolution version to download). And whenever we find a copy of the small rez one or an older vid that I had up that was downloadable we have RemoveYourContent dmca it down.

Let's assume with CM you have something worth protecting. 90% of this industry doesn't. Taking down one companies companies is pretty well useless. Because there are 10 other companies with the same content not bothering. If everyone raised the level the effect would be limited, if any. Most won't, can't afford it or think their content is so marvelous it is different. It's not in most cases.

Quote:

What is your solution to the fact that all this new content being shot by the "masters" that will cost a fortune to produce will almost instantly be worthless because it will be stolen and uploaded to a thousand torrents, a thousand file share sites, and a thousand Manwin tube sites?

Explained.

Quote:

My solution is plain and clear: Protect your content and then give the members personal interaction with the star. But sites like Brazzers can not do that. They hire girls to shoot a scene (just like you just did for them) and then that girl isn't going to be there in the members area to interact with the customers.

you're now singing from my song sheet. If the sold content can be stolen, sell content that can't. Like live.

Quote:

So what value does a scene shot for a lot of money have in these circumstances? None. Not until PIRACY is under control.

You must of noticed most of the companies suing pirates ain't online only and ain't nickel and dime ones. They're the companies with something worth protecting. It's pointless protecting most of online porn, it's all the bloody same.

Quote:

I would strongly advise all serious paysite owners in this thread to think about what I'm saying. I've seen it with my own eyes. And if it didn't work...I wouldn't do it, I'd find something else that did work. No theories. No guessing. Just plain out this is the only way to get sales going again for your site and to make a membership to your site have value.

No pint until they have something worth protecting.

Quote:

Your customers do NOT like to find out that the membership they pay for is useless because everyone else in the world is watching them for free...and that would include any content shot by Paul or any of the names he dropped in this thread.

We should do a lot more than this to respect our clients. Disrespect of them has led to them jumping ship.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

Paul you live in an "if" and "couldve been" world.
Wake up and smell the pussy, "your" world isnt coming back.

End of story.

/close thread.

Yes I do. I aim high.

As so many are dreaming that piracy will end or 2005 will come back, I suppose I'm in a big club.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

That was another of his huge lies. When it comes to facts and figures, Paul just pulls them out of his arse. He never provides a single citation. Ever.

I will leave the lies for you to tell.

50 million population in 1995, might be 60 million so let's go with that.

60 million x 2% = 1.2 million. There were far more than 1.2 million adult mags sold in the UK in 1995. Think of the two top titles and you have nearly 1 million. Escort and Fiesta.

Then add Club, Razzle, Mayfair, Men Only, Mens World, Knave, Asian Babes, Penthouse, Perfect 10, Playboy, H & E, NAUGHTY WIVES, REAL WIVES, NAUGHTY NEIGHBORS, 40 PLUS, 50 PLUS, Ravers, Hustler and many more. Galaxy had 10 titles and N & S had about 30. Then there was David Sullivan and David Gold and their magazines.

A very very long list.

Maybe best not to pull posts out of your arse. Sit on it and think a bit more.

Like most in online porn you've little clue of porn not on a computer screen.

Nathan · 05-08-2011, 07:19 AM

Paul, if you do not start believing that there are people in online porn worth more than 500 million or more than your richard desmond fella, you will die of a heart attack soon when the news breaks and you are totally caught by surprise...

Just a warning... for your own benefit.

Jack Sparrow · 05-08-2011, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Yes I do. I aim high.

As so many are dreaming that piracy will end or 2005 will come back, I suppose I'm in a big club.

Everyone in that club must be retarded, because most of us know its not coming back.

DamianJ · 05-08-2011, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I will leave the lies for you to tell.

50 million population in 1995, might be 60 million so let's go with that.

60 million x 2% = 1.2 million. There were far more than 1.2 million adult mags sold in the UK in 1995.

I spent 8 years in publishing before I worked in porn, and no one discusses ANNUAL circulations. Ever. There is a thing called the ABC, and they verify the monthly circulations. This is what agencies use to do their media planning. Except the porn mags weren't audited, so the produced publisher's statements, which were basically made up so they can sell more ads.

Thought someone like you would have known that, love?

So to anyone who knew anything about magazines your statement read that UK sold 1.2 million a month. Which is clearly bollocks. DYS?

Anyway, carry on with your 'wishing piracy didn't exist and it was 1995' club you claim is so popular. I hope you have fun.

Jakez · 05-08-2011, 09:36 AM

I'm still not understanding how bringing porn to the internet was a bad idea when in the beginning the average ratios were better than 1:50 and there were free pics and clips everywhere. If 100 people visited a paysite and 2 signed up is that not 2%? As if the percent even matters, it's a huge revenue stream and no one is going to turn that down and they damn sure couldn't see the future.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

Paul, if you do not start believing that there are people in online porn worth more than 500 million or more than your richard desmond fella, you will die of a heart attack soon when the news breaks and you are totally caught by surprise...

Just a warning... for your own benefit.

Well list a few.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

I spent 8 years in publishing before I worked in porn, and no one discusses ANNUAL circulations. Ever. There is a thing called the ABC, and they verify the monthly circulations. This is what agencies use to do their media planning. Except the porn mags weren't audited, so the produced publisher's statements, which were basically made up so they can sell more ads.

Thought someone like you would have known that, love?

So to anyone who knew anything about magazines your statement read that UK sold 1.2 million a month. Which is clearly bollocks. DYS?

Anyway, carry on with your 'wishing piracy didn't exist and it was 1995' club you claim is so popular. I hope you have fun.

I was talking monthly circulations.

Give us some real facts or judgments like I did. Do you know what was the minimum profitable print run for a color magazine in 1995? The level beyond which the price rose to a level that printing less was simply not profitable?

Did you know I was a regular advertiser in many magazines in 1995?

You make empty statements.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jakez

I'm still not understanding how bringing porn to the internet was a bad idea when in the beginning the average ratios were better than 1:50 and there were free pics and clips everywhere. If 100 people visited a paysite and 2 signed up is that not 2%? As if the percent even matters, it's a huge revenue stream and no one is going to turn that down and they damn sure couldn't see the future.

It was a bloody marvelous idea and handled properly by business men who understood porn, the market and the Internet it could of been a pot of gold.

but some get rich quick fools decided the best way to sell porn was to give it away, make affiliates important far beyond their need and to spend a lot of money selling a product that basically sells itself.

Maybe done right we would still be getting 2% ratios. Traffic would be lower because all the free loaders wouldn't be here. But all those who could and would buy. Would HAVE to buy. Today they don't and what's plainly clear is they don't.

In the beginning there was nothing like the free content there is today, so I assume you're talking BS through not being around then.

In the beginning hosting and BW was a lot of money and slow. Sites simply couldn't afford to give out tons of free content. The cost factor dictated the amount. Also if you were around in 1995-2000 you will remember the size of movies and the compression level.

You don't need to spend 50% of your turnover selling porn, porn is a product that sells itself. Men love it, men seek it and prior to the affiliate programs loading images onto Newsgroups brought great traffic.

Paying affiliates 5% would of been fine. 95 wold never of got past the first few months. Those that did would of put up more than enough free porn to bring the interested. If you were around in the early days you would know about the problems of getting a gallery listed on a good TGP site.

The reason so many affiliates need traffic is because, there's too many of them. Too much traffic is needed to get a sale, because too many affiliates are putting up too much free porn.

The notion that surfers would only come because of the ease, convenience and availability of online porn is ridiculous. Prior to the Internet men would drive many miles to get a porn mag or video. To then give them free porn is the quantity online porn does s ludicrous. It satisfies the need of 999-1,000 or even 1999-2,000. That's the number of lost prospective customers.

Someone looking regularly at a product is a prospective client. Discount those in countries we can't bill, those under 18 and the loss is vast.

Online people only see the 1 in 1,000 who did buy.

Agent 488 · 05-08-2011, 10:15 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Moved_My_Cheese%3F

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

It was a bloody marvelous idea and handled properly by business men who understood porn, the market and the Internet it could of been a pot of gold.

but some get rich quick fools decided the best way to sell porn was to give it away, make affiliates important far beyond their need and to spend a lot of money selling a product that basically sells itself.

Maybe done right we would still be getting 2% ratios. Traffic would be lower because all the free loaders wouldn't be here. But all those who could and would buy. Would HAVE to buy. Today they don't and what's plainly clear is they don't.

In the beginning there was nothing like the free content there is today, so I assume you're talking BS through not being around then.

In the beginning hosting and BW was a lot of money and slow. Sites simply couldn't afford to give out tons of free content. The cost factor dictated the amount. Also if you were around in 1995-2000 you will remember the size of movies and the compression level.

You don't need to spend 50% of your turnover selling porn, porn is a product that sells itself. Men love it, men seek it and prior to the affiliate programs loading images onto Newsgroups brought great traffic.

Paying affiliates 5% would of been fine. 95 wold never of got past the first few months. Those that did would of put up more than enough free porn to bring the interested. If you were around in the early days you would know about the problems of getting a gallery listed on a good TGP site.

The reason so many affiliates need traffic is because, there's too many of them. Too much traffic is needed to get a sale, because too many affiliates are putting up too much free porn.

The notion that surfers would only come because of the ease, convenience and availability of online porn is ridiculous. Prior to the Internet men would drive many miles to get a porn mag or video. To then give them free porn is the quantity online porn does s ludicrous. It satisfies the need of 999-1,000 or even 1999-2,000. That's the number of lost prospective customers.

Someone looking regularly at a product is a prospective client. Discount those in countries we can't bill, those under 18 and the loss is vast.

Online people only see the 1 in 1,000 who did buy.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

Except the porn mags weren't audited, so the produced publisher's statements, which were basically made up so they can sell more ads.

Thought someone like you would have known that, love?

Yes I did know that. I was an advertiser. The companies that advertised in printed porn were far more intelligent than mainstream advertisers. They monitored the performance of mags by coding the advert, phone companies did it with a phone number, mail order did it in the address.

Like I did

P.O. Box 9 (E)
Ilford
Essex.

For Escort, (R) for Razzle, (AB) for Asian Babes.

You don't know a lot about this do you.

What was your roll in publishing. Did you have a paper round?

Robbie · 05-08-2011, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

In Robbies defence, thats almost all NaughtyAmerica content. Not his own ;)

I'm not sure that DamianJ has any understanding of this business in any way at all. Certainly he doesn't understand that guys who are fans of specific girls have already seen that old N.A. content and have already seen that old content of mine that was shot before I began aggressively protecting it.

He doesn't understand that they want to see the latest thing we are doing because our scenes tell stories (dumb little stories with humor...but stories nonetheless) and follow a timeline of real life.

I have the guy on "ignore" because he doesn't really seem to have a grasp on much of anything in this business. I guess he's trying real hard to be one of those fringe parasites who makes his living off of real pornographers...but so far he seems to have failed at that too.

The only thing that I see DamianJ doing is trolling GFY and giving the impression to everyone that piracy can't be stopped and everyone should just give up and accept the gideongallery new "revenue stream" where your content is stolen, there's nothing you can do about it, and you should be happy to make pennies on the dollar.

That's why he is inconsequential to serious people in this business.

shade001 · 05-08-2011, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bjlover

Watching you having a serious mental breakdown was funny for about a year, now it is seriously tragic.

Paul suckering people into arguing with him on subjects he knows little about has been going on for years and years, trust me.

Paul Markham · 05-08-2011, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I'm not sure that DamianJ has any understanding of this business in any way at all.

I'm positive he has no understanding of any business.

He makes posts about my content, yet he never shot anything above Pornbeer.

He makes comments about my paysite and his best site is Pornbeer.

He makes comments about me living in Czech for some reason only he knows.

He makes comments about our house and he lives in a rented dump. Well it looks like a dump on his PB videos, that he can't afford to host.

In fact comments on other peoples achievements only high lights his lack of them.

Now commenting about my figures on UK Adult Magazine circulation. Another thing he's totally clueless about.

So he fit's in so well on GFY. Loads of clueless broke commentators here.

Roald · 05-08-2011, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I'm positive he has no understanding of any business.

He makes posts about my content, yet he never shot anything above Pornbeer.

He makes comments about my paysite and his best site is Pornbeer.

He makes comments about me living in Czech for some reason only he knows.

He makes comments about our house and he lives in a rented dump. Well it looks like a dump on his PB videos, that he can't afford to host.

In fact comments on other peoples achievements only high lights his lack of them.

Now commenting about my figures on UK Adult Magazine circulation. Another thing he's totally clueless about.

So he fit's in so well on GFY. Loads of clueless broke commentators here.

DamianJ · 05-09-2011, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I was talking monthly circulations.

Oh my god. I gave you an out, you could have said you meant annual. Then you wouldn't need to embarrass yourself.

Porn mags didn't ever sell 1.2 million a month.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Give us some real facts or judgments like I did.

You gave bullshit, based on the bullshit you were told about the circulations love.

Prove it. Just prove your lies. You can't because you are talking out of your arsehole. Again.

Porn mags weren't audited, so if you THINK they sold that many, it is because the person SELLING YOU THE ADVERTISING told you.

/me makes Joey Deacon face.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Do you know what was the minimum profitable print run for a color magazine in 1995?

There's no such thing. Depends on a huge amount of variables, you'd know this if you have ANY idea how publishing works, beyond giving Desmond money each month.

Cover price, pagination, ad yield, newstand %, subs, etc. I love it when you try and make it sound like you know something, yet the details you give to try and look impressive only make it more clear you are just talking shit. It's hilarious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Did you know I was a regular advertiser in many magazines in 1995?

Did you know I was an Ad Manager for Haymarket in 1995 running a team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

You make empty statements.

And you post lies constantly as if they were truth. I just point out you are again posting shit with absolutely no evidence.

I guess you'll be here more now you've been called out on B&B for associating with scammers and cheaters. Shame.

Paul Markham · 05-09-2011, 12:32 AM

Yes Roald, I've been in business for over 35 years. In the porn business and the garment industry.

As a salesman I was one of the top guys and rose to a manager then director then partner of a company I part owned. got out when the markets crashed in the 80s. Bad time to sell office furniture.

Been selling porn since 1977, producing, marketing and selling at more levels than most here.

Damian has done what? Well what ever it is, it hasn't made him a lot of money.

Do I know anything about marketing online porn?

I know enough to know that paying guys like you loads of money to do an easy job, only makes the job harder. You're a barrier between the customer and supplier. Not a sales aid, a sales hindrance. Now free porn is biting you all in the ass. Did I tell you it would, years ago?

Well yes I did. I've been telling you traffic isn't king. And getting it is the easiest job in porn.

Damian again comes up with loads of blah, blah and no proof. He says I'm lying and lets that be proof.

Damian has nothing to back up his accusations and now tells us he went from Ad Manager for Haymarket in 1995 running a team. This would of been when he was 25. To where he is today. Guess that must really suck in terms of career regression.

Damian you're just making yourself look like a bigger failure. The idea of a career is to climb the ladder, not slide down it.

What exactly do you do today, not the companies you allege to advise. What exactly do you do for them?

Roald · 05-09-2011, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Yes Roald, I've been in business for over 35 years. In the porn business and the garment industry.

I know enough to know that paying guys like you loads of money to do an easy job, only makes the job harder. You're a barrier between the customer and supplier. Not a sales aid, a sales hindrance. Now free porn is biting you all in the ass. Did I tell you it would, years ago?

Well yes I did. I've been telling you traffic isn't king. And getting it is the easiest job in porn.

Now I think about it for a sec you are correct. No idea why we have all these people here at all, brb got 20 people to send home cause this is soo easy we don't need them anymore.

Thanks for saving us a ton of money

DamianJ · 05-09-2011, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I'm positive he has no understanding of any business.

I know the "wind up Paul Markham" business well, my friend. Why is it you didn't buy www.paulmarkhamteens.co.uk?

Lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

He makes posts about my content, yet he never shot anything above Pornbeer.

Paul, how many films do film critics make before they are allowed to criticise films? That's right! None! People can form opinions on something without actually doing that something. Restaurant critics don't own restaurants. Art critics don't paint. Anyway, you said the best comment about your content, and ladies and gentlemen, I quote "My content isn't good enough anymore". You do the damage yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

He makes comments about my paysite and his best site is Pornbeer.

See above. But frankly your Alexa speaks volumes about your "pay" (and I use the word fucking loosely) site. Still lying about having 348 members? Hehe.

No wonder you are pissed at people who actually have and understand traffic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

He makes comments about me living in Czech for some reason only he knows.

Lots of people know the reason Paul. It's discussed at shows. I just said I won't post it. And I won't. Wouldn't want you getting into more trouble. I know we troll each other, but there are lines. And I won't go over them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

He makes comments about our house and he lives in a rented dump.

I've never made a comment on your house other than the fact you are too scared to post a picture of it. Why are you so scared? Is it THAT embarrassing? Heheh. Coward. Imagine being so scared to post a pic of the house you boast about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

In fact comments on other peoples achievements only high lights his lack of them.

I don't think you have achieved anything Paul. We both know why you left the UK, we both know why you are too scared to post a pic of your mansion. What you have, is a wife you bought, who you make go out to work while you suck the cock of piracy and post lies. Lol. Sucks to be you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Now commenting about my figures on UK Adult Magazine circulation. Another thing he's totally clueless about.

Just post a link to prove you're right.

Oh yeah, you can't.

Just stop with the lying Paul. It's tiresome. You've had to beg for help from this community on several occasions. If you keep posting obvious lies, do you think people will help you in the future?

It's likely, from what I hear, you will need help again. So I'd cut out the lying, or just reduce it a little.

xxx

DamianJ · 05-09-2011, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Damian again comes up with loads of blah, blah and no proof. He says I'm lying and lets that be proof.

Who is publishing your ebook, liar?
Where are the circulation figures for the porn mags, liar?
Where is the pic of your mansion, liar?
Where are the glasses you needed money for, liar?

I cannot take a pic of your house and post it, I cannot show verified circ figures for mags, I can't post who is publishing your ebook. Because they are all lies you told Paul. YOU have to prove your lies. How can I prove something that is a lie? It's a lie. The clue is in the name.

You make this so effortless.

Thanks.

You're making ArseWithClass look like a genius.

19teenporn · 05-09-2011, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

Who is publishing your ebook, liar?
Where are the circulation figures for the porn mags, liar?
Where is the pic of your mansion, liar?
Where are the glasses you needed money for, liar?

I cannot take a pic of your house and post it, I cannot show verified circ figures for mags, I can't post who is publishing your ebook. Because they are all lies you told Paul. YOU have to prove your lies. How can I prove something that is a lie? It's a lie. The clue is in the name.

You make this so effortless.
Thanks.

You're making ArseWithClass look like a genius.

Well, after reading this long thread and lmao, i think we all deserve that guy Paul puts proove of his aseverations here...

Or at least a picture of his mansion...

Paul Markham · 05-09-2011, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

Now I think about it for a sec you are correct. No idea why we have all these people here at all, brb got 20 people to send home cause this is soo easy we don't need them anymore.

Thanks for saving us a ton of money

Too late now. But you're dead right. The 1,000s of affiliates weren't needed. What was madness was paying them 50% or more for a sale and giving them every single tool they asked for.

So why is it hard to get a sale in online porn, when offline porn never found it so hard and in the beginning it was far far easier. Why has the slide gone from 1-50 to 1-5,000 on some methods?

Too many affiliates fighting for the same surfers. The options for the surfer today are endless, maybe more free sites than paid sites. The initial problem for a TGP was this. Getting the surfer to "The Hun" instead of "Shemp". So the initial aim was to have galleries that were more user friendly with more free content.

Then getting a gallery accepted by the TGP monitor. So the aim now was to have content that fitted the TGP owners needs over customers needs.

Then simply having enough affiliates submitting to these sites. So paysites were very focused on selling to affiliates over customers.

Then just the sheer number of affiliates and free sites made the job harder to get a surfer to your gallery and link.

The only way the paysites could come up with a solution was to load more free content online. so the amount of free content and BW of the servers with the free content on was more likely to far exceed the servers and BW on the members area.

Of course the over all cost of this varied from site to site. Whales didn't want 50% they demanded far far more. Sometimes 65% + or a very high PPS. So these guys sending the bulk of the traffic were getting the most money. The cost of putting a single gallery or banner on a TGP site varied, from what the top ones charged down to the partner program.

The there was the cost of supporting these guys. Reps, tools, updates, hosting, blogs, designs, banners, what ever was asked for. Then the cost of finding affiliates. A visit to a show can easily cost $5,000 per person. Rooms, food, travel, passes, etc. Without parties so people can drink free booze.

And the whole thing was like a snowball rolling downhill. The further it went, the bigger it got and the faster it went.

Until free porn was attracting 1,000 people. Getting 999 off and 1 buying. Are you going to tell me that was good business?

So far no one has, they all make stupid statements about how I'm old, past it, don't understand online marketing. Yet the achievements of you younger, clued it guys who do understand online marketing has made porn one of the attractions online and least paid for. Maybe you needed more people who didn't understand it back in 1998. Because the rest of you fucked it up good.

I understand how affiliates hate these posts. They have good reason to. 95% of them wouldn't of survived without 50% payments and every support possible. The question is.

Did we really need them. Would a porn world with 3 TGP sites. 100 affiliates meant less customers? Less free loaders without a doubt.

OK Damian. if I post a picture of my home will you not say it's not my home?

carzygirls · 05-09-2011, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Sparrow

7 sales today from putting 2 videos on 2 big tubes

Bullshit.

You can't even advertise on gfy bc of your established drama and bullshit... and I call bulshit to that.

What's the site, show your stats

Paul Markham · 05-09-2011, 02:33 AM

What he didn't do is supply what the original poster asked for.

How many views on those clips, how many clicks and then sales.

In fact no one has because posting them today in the decline of the market will prove my point.

We spend more time and money getting surfers off for free than we do keeping paying customers happy.

carzygirls · 05-09-2011, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

What he didn't do is supply what the original poster asked for.

How many views on those clips, how many clicks and then sales.

In fact no one has because posting them today in the decline of the market will prove my point.

We spend more time and money getting surfers off for free than we do keeping paying customers happy.

Free is fine... that is what you need to do.

Sparrow aka his tube site is so full of shit he should be banned bc he belittles people and he is quite simply.... a moron

Jack Sparrow · 05-09-2011, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carzygirls

Free is fine... that is what you need to do.

Sparrow aka his tube site is so full of shit he should be banned bc he belittles people and he is quite simply.... a moron

I see your fake broke nick returned.
Lets see how long it takes this time lol.

Paul Markham · 05-09-2011, 06:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carzygirls

Free is fine... that is what you need to do.

Sparrow aka his tube site is so full of shit he should be banned bc he belittles people and he is quite simply.... a moron

Free content, legal and not, killed the magazine industry, devastated the DVD industry and everyone was whooping for joy. Telling them they didn't understand online marketing.

Now free is devastating paid online porn. Free online porn is making great leaps and bounds. While they scrape a living selling ad space and a few conversions in the million of surfers.

We never needed to give away free porn to sell it. But once the online marketing gurus got finished, we arrived at a place where the biggest cost in the industry is getting off free surfers.

You can't call it the traffic marketing game. That's an insult on real marketing.

I really don't know the solution, I've made a few suggestions that might work for some. The problem is the money left after the cost of free porn is paid. Won't leave enough for the members area for most sites.

I estimate that the average spend on the members area is 10%, give or take a few.

That's $3 a member.

A decent solo girl scene will cost $1,000.

15 a week = $15,000
/ by $3 = 5,000 members.

How many solo girl sites do you think today have 5,000 members as an average number?

And all that buys is a set or a video update every day, hardly enough. Especially with a shoot budget of $1,000. Unless shot in house by the owner of the site and assuming he has the skills and time to get it right.

Yes I'm sure a few people will post some sites they think have 5,000 members. Thinking it proves all do. But it proves nothing. Except they think that one site has 166 sign ups or retained members every day.

Without a re-balance of what's spent outside the members area to inside the members area. FREE will remain the better option for most surfers. It always has been, but now free is biting the hand that fed and nurtured it for so long.

DamianJ · 05-09-2011, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Free content, legal and not, killed the magazine industry, devastated the DVD industry

No it isn't. Stupidity did and having old people in charge of the companies that didn't understand online killed them. And you can add music to that mix too.

Problem with people of your age is that you simply don't *get* it.

The record labels, movie studios and publishers had it made for ages. They made stuff, priced it how they wanted it, sold it on formats they wanted and The People had no choice. Of course they were happy.

Then people realised that they wanted one song out of 18 on a new album and didn't want to buy the CD. They wanted to buy the track. But the labels wouldn't let them. So the didn't buy. Then iTunes came along, understanding online, and offered them one track for 99 cents. Biggest success story in music.

People also didn't want to pay x for a DVD packed for of non-skippable adverts and crap extras. They just wanted to watch a movie when they wanted to watch it. Netflix was born. Biggest success in movies.

People didn't want to subscribe to magazines anymore. Out dated information presented in a manner they didn't want to read. Then the Kindle came out. Low and behold, another huge success story.

I know you don't udnerstand how any of that happened Paul, but people smarter than you saw an old dinasaur of a market and disrupted it.

Nothing to do with free. It's to do with offering people content they want in a format they want at a price they want. It's not even fucking hard.

xxx

PS not seen you post over at B&B for a while, JT scared you off?

Barefootsies · 05-09-2011, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DamianJ

Who is publishing your ebook, liar?
Where are the circulation figures for the porn mags, liar?
Where is the pic of your mansion, liar?
Where are the glasses you needed money for, liar?

I cannot take a pic of your house and post it, I cannot show verified circ figures for mags, I can't post who is publishing your ebook. Because they are all lies you told Paul. YOU have to prove your lies. How can I prove something that is a lie? It's a lie. The clue is in the name.

You make this so effortless.

Thanks.

You're making ArseWithClass look like a genius.

Jack Sparrow · 05-09-2011, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carzygirls

Bullshit.

You can't even advertise on gfy bc of your established drama and bullshit... and I call bulshit to that.

What's the site, show your stats

I dont want to advertise on gfy. What use would i have in advertising my programs here?

Show you stats.. bahahahahah

Your not getting ANY stats on my programs, how i do it, what sites, what videos.

Nothing. Good luck trying

05-07-2011, 03:49 AM	#155
Jakez Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: oddfuturewolfgangkillthemall!!!!!!! Posts: 5,656	Another pic on imgur for you Paul, just another day of ads on tubes with long videos __________________ [email protected] - jakezdumb - 573689400 Killuminati

05-08-2011, 03:20 AM	#168
DVTimes xxx Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: UK Posts: 31,544	I do not understand why porn firms do not sue tube sites and other sites. the music and film biz would sue for millions. what do porn firms do? send them and email saying can you please remove or your being bad email. i bet tube sites get scared to get those emails. only to pull the clip, then have it uploaded a few days later again. If I had known how little porn firms deal with stolen content, i wish i had simply stolen all the content from everyones sites years ago and set up a big site with it all. And what do firms now do? volentry post there content to tube sites. Its like taking all your goods down to the burglers home as that way it saves the burgler breaking into your house. __________________ The Affiliate Program

05-08-2011, 03:37 AM	#169
DVTimes xxx Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: UK Posts: 31,544	Burning Angel has jumped on to the litigation bandwagon with its first porn BitTorrent suit against users who allegedly have pirated its movies. Burning Angel's porn BitTorrent suit at federal court in Chicago was one of seven filed nationwide on Wednesday. Both Hard Drive Productions and Corbin Fisher filed two suits a piece, with MCGIP and First Time Videos each filing single claims against scores of pirates. So far, adult entertainment companies in the past year have waged hundreds of suits against thousands of defendants. Many claims have been paid out, attorneys say. Burning Angel, according to its suit against 22 individuals for allegedly pirating "L.A. Pink," is considered a premier name within the alt-porn niche. In fact, Joanna Angel, the website’s namesake model, was named in 2011 by CNBC as one of the 12 most popular stars in porn. But substantially all of the works ever produced by Angel and her company can be pirated via the BitTorrent protocol, the suit says. Angel told XBIZ on Thursday that her company has faced the scourge of piracy in a big way because she considers Burning Angel as still a small business. "Piracy has affected our entire industry," she says, "but in our case we are a small company, and we would have been a bigger company if piracy weren't so rampant. We've plateaued but are still trudging through." Angel says the only way the adult entertainment industry can succeed with free porn a click away is if the industry truly coalesces against piracy. "Piracy can't be battled by just one person, it should be done as a whole," she says. All seven suits seek court approval to identify John Doe defendants via subpoenas through their Internet service providers. http://www.xbiz.com/news/133687 __________________ The Affiliate Program

05-08-2011, 07:19 AM	#174
Nathan Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 3,108	Paul, if you do not start believing that there are people in online porn worth more than 500 million or more than your richard desmond fella, you will die of a heart attack soon when the news breaks and you are totally caught by surprise... Just a warning... for your own benefit. __________________ "Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right." - Charlie Munger

05-08-2011, 09:36 AM	#177
Jakez Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: oddfuturewolfgangkillthemall!!!!!!! Posts: 5,656	I'm still not understanding how bringing porn to the internet was a bad idea when in the beginning the average ratios were better than 1:50 and there were free pics and clips everywhere. If 100 people visited a paysite and 2 signed up is that not 2%? As if the percent even matters, it's a huge revenue stream and no one is going to turn that down and they damn sure couldn't see the future. __________________ [email protected] - jakezdumb - 573689400 Killuminati

05-07-2011, 03:56 AM	#156
Jack Sparrow Almost goners.. Industry Role: Join Date: May 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 11,420	7 sales today from putting 2 videos on 2 big tubes. Aint much right? Nope, its for the little leaguers. But guess what, it takes me 10 minutes a day to do this. Count those 7 sales x 30 a month x 12 a year. And its still not getting me rich right. But it sure as hell isnt hurting my bank account either. And im not talking about paying for adspace. Im not throwing up just ANY video. Im doing it my way, and my way works for me. Its something that has been finetuned and tweaked, and im NOT going to spill the beans on how to do this properly. But if you think a tube with a lot of free porn cant get you any sales, boy you are wrong. Attracting millions of horney flies with free shit, and some will stick. This isnt the 90's but again: It sure as hell aint hurting my bankaccount, nor does it take much time.

05-08-2011, 02:06 AM	#166
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	the only time i bought any intellectual property aside from a book in the last ten years was when i was unable to find a torrent or download somewhere.

05-08-2011, 03:05 AM	#167
Jack Sparrow Almost goners.. Industry Role: Join Date: May 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 11,420	Paul you live in an "if" and "couldve been" world. Wake up and smell the pussy, "your" world isnt coming back. End of story. /close thread.

05-09-2011, 12:32 AM	#187
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	Yes Roald, I've been in business for over 35 years. In the porn business and the garment industry. As a salesman I was one of the top guys and rose to a manager then director then partner of a company I part owned. got out when the markets crashed in the 80s. Bad time to sell office furniture. Been selling porn since 1977, producing, marketing and selling at more levels than most here. Damian has done what? Well what ever it is, it hasn't made him a lot of money. Do I know anything about marketing online porn? I know enough to know that paying guys like you loads of money to do an easy job, only makes the job harder. You're a barrier between the customer and supplier. Not a sales aid, a sales hindrance. Now free porn is biting you all in the ass. Did I tell you it would, years ago? Well yes I did. I've been telling you traffic isn't king. And getting it is the easiest job in porn. Damian again comes up with loads of blah, blah and no proof. He says I'm lying and lets that be proof. Damian has nothing to back up his accusations and now tells us he went from Ad Manager for Haymarket in 1995 running a team. This would of been when he was 25. To where he is today. Guess that must really suck in terms of career regression. Damian you're just making yourself look like a bigger failure. The idea of a career is to climb the ladder, not slide down it. What exactly do you do today, not the companies you allege to advise. What exactly do you do for them? __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70 Last edited by Paul Markham; 05-09-2011 at 12:42 AM..

05-09-2011, 02:33 AM	#194
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	What he didn't do is supply what the original poster asked for. How many views on those clips, how many clicks and then sales. In fact no one has because posting them today in the decline of the market will prove my point. We spend more time and money getting surfers off for free than we do keeping paying customers happy. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70 Last edited by Paul Markham; 05-09-2011 at 02:35 AM..