downloadable vs streaming paysite please comment - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Paul Markham · 02-03-2009, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EscortBiz

and surfers are figuring out that most reviews sites are full of shit so thats not a long term issue at all, when a review sites lists sites based on payouts and design (not loading speed simply graphic design etc.) you know surfers wont be coming back again to them for more reviews.

Hang on a minute. You are talking about the way we ran our business for 10 years, Don't just single out review sites, we are all guilty of pushing sites based on what we get.

Paul Markham · 02-03-2009, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Of course the largest porn sites are free. They ALWAYS have been. That backs up what I stated even more. They have 'free porn', most streaming but not all.. and they are the largest, continue to be the largest, and continue to grow.

They can some how, pay the bills, with all these 'free loading no paying' surfers... Humm..

Yet, the majority of us, continue to do the same thing, continue to think the same way. And we continue to fall.

One of the first things we have to realise is the amount of traffic a site gets is irrelevant. It's the number of sales that site makes that's important and the key to the solution.

So what if a site gets 1 billion hits an hour. Those 1 billion hits are all costing money until some spend money. If they don't spend enough the site goes down to BW bills. You can put a store on Times Square but unless that store sells something you only have the rent to pay.

I imagine traffic - spend ratios on a Tube are 1-1000, we only need to get 1 in 1000 to come back to buying to make Tubes a problem we USED to have. Sadly we have been focusing on the 999 and not the 1 for the last 10 years.

We will not win the 1 back back by continuing to focus on the free loaders.

That's what I will be doing and you can see if it works. What will not work is caring about how many free loaders are looking at free porn.

stickyfingerz · 02-03-2009, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

So you are saying that you prefer masturbating with mayonnaise instead of lubricant?

Seems totally normal

(see what I did there? just like you, I responded to a post while pretending it said something entirely different than it did)

Now, an actual response to your asinine remark: what I am saying is that it pays to cover several parts of the market at once. Especially when the added costs are relatively small, and offering several options at once ensures customer satisfaction.

My girl self lubricates so no need for lube or mayonnaise.

Do you think Netflix chose to go streaming only for their online rentals in order to keep the 56k crowd happy?

Customer satisfaction eh? My favorite analogy is the rental car one. I would be VERY satisfied if I could walk into enterprise car rental, pay 39.00 for a days rental and keep the car too. If they gave me a free car every time I rented one, I would be very unsatisfied if I could not keep the brand new car the next time I rented. You are right.

HOW DARE they not satisfy me by not giving me a 20,000.00 car.

Wait that analogy seems silly. Who would give away a car for 39.00? Well how much money do people think programs spend on their content? Customer satisfaction ends, when satisfying the customer is hurting your business, and there are other customers plenty happy to pay 29.00 to VIEW your content, rather than keep it, you go after the customers happy with just viewing.

Wastes breath....

Joshua G · 02-03-2009, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Get over that "the torrents are going to rip your shit either way" crap. NOT true. Look into CDN I recommend Cavecreek.com hit up BrianL on here. There ARE ways that can keep nearly 100% of your video content IN your members area, and not affect your members viewing experience. We stream 720p HD video with 0 buffer, you can skip anywhere in the video you want, and it plays instantly. I've had people in countries all over the world try watching with no issues.

Goto www.hulu.com if you are in the U.S. goto www.Vimeo.com too. Even Youtube has HD videos now. The trend is towards higher quality INSTANT video, not downloading and watching 9 or 10 minutes with dick in hand. The longer adult sticks to the retarded download model the worse things will get.

thanks...i will look into CDN. Do you get any shit from customers because of their connections or because they cant download?

SGS · 02-03-2009, 11:36 AM

TheDoc talks more sense on GFY than most of the others put together.

Libertine · 02-03-2009, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

My girl self lubricates so no need for lube or mayonnaise.

Do you think Netflix chose to go streaming only for their online rentals in order to keep the 56k crowd happy?

Customer satisfaction eh? My favorite analogy is the rental car one. I would be VERY satisfied if I could walk into enterprise car rental, pay 39.00 for a days rental and keep the car too. If they gave me a free car every time I rented one, I would be very unsatisfied if I could not keep the brand new car the next time I rented. You are right.

HOW DARE they not satisfy me by not giving me a 20,000.00 car.

Wait that analogy seems silly. Who would give away a car for 39.00? Well how much money do people think programs spend on their content? Customer satisfaction ends, when satisfying the customer is hurting your business, and there are other customers plenty happy to pay 29.00 to VIEW your content, rather than keep it, you go after the customers happy with just viewing.

Wastes breath....

You're missing a minor point: the competition is already doing it in adult.

Genies do not easily go back into bottles. Any adult company that decides not to offer downloads effectively delivers a lower standard of service than the bulk of the competition. Meanwhile, that same company will still suffer from the illegal competition that tubes with user uploads create.

Switching to a streaming-only model could work if all major programs did it at the same time. However, most won't. There's a reason for that

stickyfingerz · 02-03-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joshgirls

thanks...i will look into CDN. Do you get any shit from customers because of their connections or because they cant download?

No, no complaints. CDN serves the videos from the server closest to the member. I've had people in Costa Rica, Japan, Thailand, Canada, Mexico, etc etc test our vids, and none have had any problems with playback. Feel free to drop me an email or icq later today or tomorrow and I can show you some stuff. Don't listen to the "must have downloads" crowd.

stickyfingerz · 02-03-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

You're missing a minor point: the competition is already doing it in adult.

Genies do not easily go back into bottles. Any adult company that decides not to offer downloads effectively delivers a lower standard of service than the bulk of the competition. Meanwhile, that same company will still suffer from the illegal competition that tubes with user uploads create.

Switching to a streaming-only model could work if all major programs did it at the same time. However, most won't. There's a reason for that

Good idea. If a whole industry is being retarded follow along, and that will make you smart.

Maybe just maybe, you try to provide a higher quality product than your competitor, and you will start to garner your own market.

Shit loads of places have served coffee for years, yet somehow Starbucks is normally the first place that comes to mind to the majority of people that are craving a cup o Joe.

Think about that.

Libertine · 02-03-2009, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Good idea. If a whole industry is being retarded follow along, and that will make you smart.

Maybe just maybe, you try to provide a higher quality product than your competitor, and you will start to garner your own market.

Shit loads of places have served coffee for years, yet somehow Starbucks is normally the first place that comes to mind to the majority of people that are craving a cup o Joe.

Think about that.

If you can deliver a higher quality product, you can still be successful while delivering a lower standard of service in other areas. That much is true.

However, even then it will still negatively affect your retention, and only benefit your conversions in any noticeable way if your content is truly unique.

Plus, very few programs actually succeed in creating the truly high quality unique content that would be needed to somewhat negate the negative effects of not delivering the expected standard of service.

Paul Markham · 02-03-2009, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Wait that analogy seems silly. Who would give away a car for 39.00? Well how much money do people think programs spend on their content? Customer satisfaction ends, when satisfying the customer is hurting your business, and there are other customers plenty happy to pay 29.00 to VIEW your content, rather than keep it, you go after the customers happy with just viewing.

Wastes breath....

How much money do we spend on our members areas?

Clearly not enough because the members are supposedly leaving us to go to Tubes. We only think they are preferring Tubes to paysites. We can't prove it.

I doubt also if the cost of satisfying the customer is what's hurting us, it's trying to satisfy the people who do not buy that really hurts us. Sponsors know their biggest cost is outside the members area.

OK I don't have a simple pre packaged solution, just like everyone else here, but at least I see the problem. That is the customers don't want to buy and until we turn that around we will go the way most industries go when they lose their customers. We need to win back that 1 person in 1000 to close Tubes down. Streaming content is not the solution, it's more of a problem.

Wastes breath....

Paul Markham · 02-03-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

If you can deliver a higher quality product, you can still be successful while delivering a lower standard of service in other areas. That much is true.

However, even then it will still negatively affect your retention, and only benefit your conversions in any noticeable way if your content is truly unique.

Plus, very few programs actually succeed in creating the truly high quality unique content that would be needed to somewhat negate the negative effects of not delivering the expected standard of service.

100% spot on. We deliver pulp content and think it's special. It's so special the members are, supposedly, leaving us to watch any crap on a Tube.

I have surfed Tubes, the decent content is hard to find. OK decent for me, but I'm your typical porn buyer and should be the target for most sites. I would imagine most Tube site content appeals to 15 to 25 year olds. A lot is abusing or degrading women, faked and the same scene over and over again. The creativity level is low.

stickyfingerz · 02-03-2009, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

How much money do we spend on our members areas?

Clearly not enough because the members are supposedly leaving us to go to Tubes. We only think they are preferring Tubes to paysites. We can't prove it.

I doubt also if the cost of satisfying the customer is what's hurting us, it's trying to satisfy the people who do not buy that really hurts us. Sponsors know their biggest cost is outside the members area.

OK I don't have a simple pre packaged solution, just like everyone else here, but at least I see the problem. That is the customers don't want to buy and until we turn that around we will go the way most industries go when they lose their customers. We need to win back that 1 person in 1000 to close Tubes down. Streaming content is not the solution, it's more of a problem.

Wastes breath....

I love you Paul, but you are 100% wrong by saying that last remark. lol

Paul Markham · 02-03-2009, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

I love you Paul, but you are 100% wrong by saying that last remark. lol

Let's be real here.

I said unless the content is so marvellous and unique the surfers into that type will sign up, I feel making the package the customer buys less attractive is going to increase them flowing away.

Yes if you have content that is unique and very special stopping people downloading it will help. But how many sites have that and how much would it cost to create that kind of content for some of us? Most of us will not bother, we will spend more money outside the members area and wonder why people are not buying.

Tubes will continue to flourish, continue to get content and continue to take members away from us.
Unless you truly have something unique.

Just saying I'm wrong does not help, tell me why I'm wrong.

stickyfingerz · 02-03-2009, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Let's be real here.

I said unless the content is so marvellous and unique the surfers into that type will sign up, I feel making the package the customer buys less attractive is going to increase them flowing away.

Yes if you have content that is unique and very special stopping people downloading it will help. But how many sites have that and how much would it cost to create that kind of content for some of us? Most of us will not bother, we will spend more money outside the members area and wonder why people are not buying.

Tubes will continue to flourish, continue to get content and continue to take members away from us.
Unless you truly have something unique.

Just saying I'm wrong does not help, tell me why I'm wrong.

Tubes flourish because the door to the porn store is unlocked, not because tubes are better. Tubes of course have a huge variety of content available. Why? THEY DON'T PAY FOR THE CONTENT! Well the illegal ones don't. ugg not going over this for the millionth time. Read the March issue of AVN for the article I wrote on it. lol

Paul Markham · 02-03-2009, 01:21 PM

The problem also will be the number of affiliates who will not send traffic, the number of members who will cancel and the number who will leave after the first month. The content has to be so strong the members will stay and not move elsewhere and the affiliates will see better sigh ups that sites offering DL content.

Yes I know how Tubes can exist and maybe if 100% of the paysites went to streaming it might help, assuming the code can't be broken.

But in reality 100% will not stream and most codes can be broken. Assuming a Tube site faced with no content did not site back on what it has or/and did not start ripping DVDs.

Tubes will not just give up because 50% of site start to stream. And do you expect 50% of sponsors to change. What about the sites supported by people like Brazzers and AEBN?

I love you to Ryan and I wish streaming was an answer, just don't see it happening and see gaps in it.

BFT3K · 02-03-2009, 03:48 PM

Bump for the night crew...

raymor · 02-04-2009, 03:42 PM

First, keep in mind that streaming versus saving to hard drive are
only SUGGESTIONS to the browser. The bad guys can easily save
whatever they want to the drive. Notice I said streaming versus
saving, NOT streaming versus downloading - all video is downloaded.
The difference is ether it's watched WHILE it's downloaded or AFTER
it's downloaded. To the bad guys, it makes little or no difference.

To the good guys, it's about what's convenient for them and personal
preference, and about compatibility. A plain link to an unpackaged
unpackaged mpeg4 file will play on any system, a desktop running
any version of Windows, a Mac, a mobile phone, a Playstation, any
Linux machine - it works well for all customers. If you wrap that same
video with embed tags in an attempt to stream it, it will likely not work
in some old version of IE, or in the next version about to come out,
certainly won't work on most mobile phones, probably won't work
on the Playstaton, and will be a pain on Mac or Linux, so you're
turing away perfectly good paying customers. Flash is an extreme
example of this, in some ways, because it won't work at all on Microsoft's
latest operating systems, Vista 64 and XP 64, so with Flash as the only
option it's not Mac, Linux, or mobile users you're turning way - it's the
with the brand new Windows systems. Those of who have been
running Linux 64 bit for years have a beta Flash player, but the
Windows 64 people don't. Macromedia and Adobe have been promising
for years that they'll release one "real soon now", but don't hold your
breath. They said it was coming soon in like 2005, so offering only
Flash is definitely the worst idea.

A simple link to the video file probably WILL stream for most people,
if the MIME type is correctly set on your server, and they can right
click to save it to their drive if they wish. So that simple link to the
video is probably sufficient, but there's no reason not to offer an
embedded player as well.

stickyfingerz · 02-04-2009, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raymor

First, keep in mind that streaming versus saving to hard drive are
only SUGGESTIONS to the browser. The bad guys can easily save
whatever they want to the drive. Notice I said streaming versus
saving, NOT streaming versus downloading - all video is downloaded.
The difference is ether it's watched WHILE it's downloaded or AFTER
it's downloaded. To the bad guys, it makes little or no difference.

To the good guys, it's about what's convenient for them and personal
preference, and about compatibility. A plain link to an unpackaged
unpackaged mpeg4 file will play on any system, a desktop running
any version of Windows, a Mac, a mobile phone, a Playstation, any
Linux machine - it works well for all customers. If you wrap that same
video with embed tags in an attempt to stream it, it will likely not work
in some old version of IE, or in the next version about to come out,
certainly won't work on most mobile phones, probably won't work
on the Playstaton, and will be a pain on Mac or Linux, so you're
turing away perfectly good paying customers. Flash is an extreme
example of this, in some ways, because it won't work at all on Microsoft's
latest operating systems, Vista 64 and XP 64, so with Flash as the only
option it's not Mac, Linux, or mobile users you're turning way - it's the
with the brand new Windows systems. Those of who have been
running Linux 64 bit for years have a beta Flash player, but the
Windows 64 people don't. Macromedia and Adobe have been promising
for years that they'll release one "real soon now", but don't hold your
breath. They said it was coming soon in like 2005, so offering only
Flash is definitely the worst idea.

A simple link to the video file probably WILL stream for most people,
if the MIME type is correctly set on your server, and they can right
click to save it to their drive if they wish. So that simple link to the
video is probably sufficient, but there's no reason not to offer an
embedded player as well.

Sorry Ray you are wrong on this one. Flash Media Server 3 ENCRYPTED Streaming. Is NOT downloadable in any current means. Attempting to download any of our streaming file links (which you can't anyways in our members area as our player does not allow this, there is no link for the surfer to find), using something such as RealPlayer allows people to attempt this, will get the surfer a 8kb or so file.

I really am not worried about that .05% linux usergroup. If they want Ill be glad to refund them before I allow a member to keep our videos for 29.95 and do whatever they like with them including uploading to their favorite tube community, or rapidshare forum. Flash has something like 97% coverage, Ill stick with that.

dreamcaster · 02-04-2009, 06:24 PM

I use a download site to sell content and it makes more than I could ever make with pay streaming sites with low promo energy.

Joshua G · 08-02-2009, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Sorry Ray you are wrong on this one. Flash Media Server 3 ENCRYPTED Streaming. Is NOT downloadable in any current means. Attempting to download any of our streaming file links (which you can't anyways in our members area as our player does not allow this, there is no link for the surfer to find), using something such as RealPlayer allows people to attempt this, will get the surfer a 8kb or so file.

I really am not worried about that .05% linux usergroup. If they want Ill be glad to refund them before I allow a member to keep our videos for 29.95 and do whatever they like with them including uploading to their favorite tube community, or rapidshare forum. Flash has something like 97% coverage, Ill stick with that.

thanks stickyfingerz & Doc I am making adjustments to my business plan because of your advice.

-Josh

PornHero · 08-02-2009, 06:33 PM

Interesting discussion... Anyone know of any adult programs that offer paysites with streaming-only members areas?

Might as well send some traffic and see how they do

d-null · 08-02-2009, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornHero

Interesting discussion... Anyone know of any adult programs that offer paysites with streaming-only members areas?

Might as well send some traffic and see how they do

I'm with you on that, never did like the downloadable model, and some of the paysites are crazy with it with gigantic file sizes that just have to turn off a good percentage of their users, streaming makes so much sense imo

02-03-2009, 11:36 AM	#55
SGS Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mallorca - Nottingham Posts: 5,176	TheDoc talks more sense on GFY than most of the others put together. __________________ See sig...

02-03-2009, 01:21 PM	#65
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	The problem also will be the number of affiliates who will not send traffic, the number of members who will cancel and the number who will leave after the first month. The content has to be so strong the members will stay and not move elsewhere and the affiliates will see better sigh ups that sites offering DL content. Yes I know how Tubes can exist and maybe if 100% of the paysites went to streaming it might help, assuming the code can't be broken. But in reality 100% will not stream and most codes can be broken. Assuming a Tube site faced with no content did not site back on what it has or/and did not start ripping DVDs. Tubes will not just give up because 50% of site start to stream. And do you expect 50% of sponsors to change. What about the sites supported by people like Brazzers and AEBN? I love you to Ryan and I wish streaming was an answer, just don't see it happening and see gaps in it. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

02-04-2009, 03:42 PM	#67
raymor Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 3,745	First, keep in mind that streaming versus saving to hard drive are only SUGGESTIONS to the browser. The bad guys can easily save whatever they want to the drive. Notice I said streaming versus saving, NOT streaming versus downloading - all video is downloaded. The difference is ether it's watched WHILE it's downloaded or AFTER it's downloaded. To the bad guys, it makes little or no difference. To the good guys, it's about what's convenient for them and personal preference, and about compatibility. A plain link to an unpackaged unpackaged mpeg4 file will play on any system, a desktop running any version of Windows, a Mac, a mobile phone, a Playstation, any Linux machine - it works well for all customers. If you wrap that same video with embed tags in an attempt to stream it, it will likely not work in some old version of IE, or in the next version about to come out, certainly won't work on most mobile phones, probably won't work on the Playstaton, and will be a pain on Mac or Linux, so you're turing away perfectly good paying customers. Flash is an extreme example of this, in some ways, because it won't work at all on Microsoft's latest operating systems, Vista 64 and XP 64, so with Flash as the only option it's not Mac, Linux, or mobile users you're turning way - it's the with the brand new Windows systems. Those of who have been running Linux 64 bit for years have a beta Flash player, but the Windows 64 people don't. Macromedia and Adobe have been promising for years that they'll release one "real soon now", but don't hold your breath. They said it was coming soon in like 2005, so offering only Flash is definitely the worst idea. A simple link to the video file probably WILL stream for most people, if the MIME type is correctly set on your server, and they can right click to save it to their drive if they wish. So that simple link to the video is probably sufficient, but there's no reason not to offer an embedded player as well. __________________ For historical display only. This information is not current: support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627 Strongbox - The next generation in site security Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids

02-04-2009, 06:24 PM	#69
dreamcaster Registered User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: SFV Posts: 11	Downloadable I use a download site to sell content and it makes more than I could ever make with pay streaming sites with low promo energy.

02-03-2009, 03:48 PM	#66
BFT3K Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Narnia Posts: 10,764	Bump for the night crew...

08-02-2009, 06:33 PM	#71
PornHero Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,381	Interesting discussion... Anyone know of any adult programs that offer paysites with streaming-only members areas? Might as well send some traffic and see how they do