:)

You've always had a nifty knack of saying people said what they didn't say. What I actually said was I don't care how much a program costs to run, how much the content costs to produce or who it employs.

I don't care about a lot of other stuff too, including whether or not I like the content. What I like is irrelevant.

Cams taught me that long ago. I'd push all the girls I thought looked pretty hot and assumed most people would think the same. I was too stupid for words.

But anyway, as someone else said, you've earnt your right to your opinion. I hope you still find a way to make a nice nest egg out of your old content. We've all got our own opinion/experiences of what works for us. Ain't no monopoly on who's right and who's wrong.

Pay site won't profit at 50%, that means you are going to get cheated somehow

I ran paysites for 12+ years and payed out 60% on ccbill. I understand the cross and upselling to other sites but in this case the site actually rebills nicely.

They only need to look at the industry today to see what is being afforded. How many independent American/English speaking girls are working their own traffic and sites, how many rely on affiliates, which trend is growing?

Which is the easiest to sell?

The days of paying out huge amounts of the purchase price to affiliate who do no more than sent 100s or even 10,000s of surfers to a site that don't like what they see is coming to an end. The problemis getting them to see what's happening at the present time.

Well you should care because they all lead to the quality ot the product.

As you say it's not about personal tastes unless they're spot on. It's about which girl is saleable. If you don't know that, you're just slinging a lot of traffic at a site and hoping.

They only need to do the calculations of what it costs toset up and run a site. Paying 50% was and is unsustainable unless the site owner was shooting his own great content, had a reservoir of models, cheap location and a massive members list.

The number of paysites who crashed and burned because the product wasn't good enough is longer than the San Fran bridge.

When it comes to cams the case is no different.

20% to the affiliate
20% to the site
20% to the studio
20% to the model
20% For profit

Why should someone who does no more than send lots of hits of people looking to buy cams when models, inhouse staff can do a better and cheaper job?

The surfers want girls that speak English well, in a room that's more than a bed, are motivated and they want to deal direct with them. They don't want to be sent to a site then have to sort out a model they like. Interactive social media is killing that kind of traffic. Sites are now giving the models the affiliates and studio cut and running on the 20% where they find the profit.

You did not pay on rebills?

nope, I payed rebills too. Back in the day I made good money upselling to webcams.com I think then when CB came along I switched over to that. I didn't pay models a percentage just payed them for modeling. Then around 08 I dabbled in ex gf stuff. Closed up in 2015 cause I couldn't see paying $3k a year for visa and MC and server bills when I was making more money from CB.

So in the end I didn't make it but I know of a few solo sites that are still making money at it.

I had heard numbers from a client that made 50% seem unprofitable

I love the "who needs affiliates?" argument. LOL Especially coming from people with no skin in the game, like Paul.

Affiliates = traffic. Period. If a webmaster sends a visitor to a site from his site that webmaster wants and expects to get paid. And he should. That 50% for paysite affiliates Paul is bitching about is EXACTLY what I as a Program Owner want! Why? Because it's free money. It's a FREE sale Paul. It's a sale I would otherwise not get. So, to me, it's passive income. Yay affiliates!

Now this does not mean I stop my own "in-house" traffic generation. Of course I make more without affiliates (duh) but see above. It's not an either/or situation. You do/have BOTH. Get affiliates AND you do your own traffic generation, traffic and media buys, link exchanges, etc etc.

Geez Louise. LOL

If ALL your sales/revenue is 50% from paysites and you are shooting content 1-3 times per week for updates then yes 50% would be a tough margin. But hopefully only a % of your money comes from affiliates.

100% this ^ I've also ran free sites since 2001 and I was one of my top 5 affiliates selling my stuff

Thanks :)

Major points that prove you're wrong.

Affiliates do not have a monopoly on traffic, anyone can find and send it. I'm not advocating doing nothing to get it. Even you tell us that you're having to send a lot of your own traffic.

Then there's the methods affiliates use to get traffic. Using google they could be getting your traffic just because you have to compete with them on Google. Using your samples to submit to other sites, they're using your content to get traffic you could be getting.

Getting 50% for doing no more than using what you supply and can use. Is too high and we've seen too many programs fail because of it. You're picking up those failures soall power to you.

Then there's the money spent on content. You expect content providers to work for a reduced wage, then you only get content providers who have no alternative. I had an alterative that paid much better than what paysites could offer, so I went for it.

So why not drop the affiliates and employ someone inhouse?

Concentrate on what you do best.

You only have to do the calculations to know 50% is unsustainable and buy in good content. Unless you're already driving 80-90% of your own traffic.

Well said

I totally agree with what Mr Porn Nerd stated. I make sales for my sponsors because I offer something my traffic wants and comes back for daily. If I didn't, I would have nothing to offer sponsors. A lot of businesses work the same, notably real estate. The listing agent rarely sells the house, it's usually another agent. Same difference. I guarantee you, the sponsor is not going to make the sale I made for them, that's wishful thinking.