| Type |
Site - Score |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
2076
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
anonuser718's Reply
That's excellent news! The first I heard of it going back to the old way was a user comment at Rabbitsreviews. Now that you've provided confirmation I think I'll sign up again.
Thanks for posting this.
|
11-12-18 05:43pm
|
Reply
2077
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
pornpundit's Comment
I read on another forum that they've recently scrapped their new model that required subscribing to individual 'channels' at a high cost and went back to their old model of one subscription gets you access to everything. I take it from your comment that this isn't your experience?
I'm a big fan of the site but there's no way I'll rejoin until they fix their billing model.
|
11-12-18 12:50pm
|
Reply
2078
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
Jade1's Reply
That sounds like an apt and accurate analogy. RIP Naughty America.
|
04-07-18 04:24am
|
Reply
2079
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
jcv14's Comment
Naughty America was on my list of sites I'd regularly join. I really like a lot of what they produce. But... based on what you guys are saying it looks like a new subscription won't happen until at least there is more information available or Naughty America gives up and goes back to the old model. Or maybe this will just kill them after a while once everyone who isn't aware of the changes joins without the knowledge of the changes.
I get that the porn business is changing and that it is getting hard to make a profit these days, but crap like this will only make paying for porn even more rare.
|
04-04-18 01:17pm
|
Reply
2080
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
WeedLordVegeta's Comment
Thanks for mentioning this. I also browse through sites by using new tabs and to be accused of being a bot and have my account suspended would be a pain in the ass. If I rejoin here I'll be sure to follow your advice.
|
03-13-18 01:49pm
|
Reply
2081
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
drunk hillbilly's Comment
I'm not exactly tech savvy, but I find what usually works for me is clearing my history and cache and then go back in through TBP / PU.
|
01-14-14 02:53pm
|
Reply
2082
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Reply
Your reply sounds like either an apology or a justification and neither is needed. Sites change and our tastes change. I can only imagine what nasty things I'd have written about Burning Angel had I joined a year ago rather than after my 'conversion' to some limited interest in tattoos.
I don't think you took my comments this way, but to be clear, I wasn't accusing you of being too subjective. Subjectivity plays a role in any review, even the ones done by the staff at TBP, but a good reviewer looks past their likes and dislike and gives an objective review. You did just that in both your reviews and scored the site differently. No big deal. In both cases the reviews were written by an objective person who was writing about his experiences with the site at that time.
Both reviews were great and I'd rely on both in making a decision to join the site if I had no personal history with it.
|
12-27-12 08:33pm
|
Reply
2083
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
messmer's Review
Excellent review! Like you, I was surprised at how much I like this network knowing that it really does promote 'enhanced' models. I was also interested to note that you've increased your score a full 10 points since you last reviewed the network which is another indication how they've improved over the past years.
|
12-27-12 11:31am
|
Reply
2084
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
marcdc1's Reply
Sorry to hear that... but I'm glad it wasn't something that I was doing wrong...
|
11-07-12 04:56pm
|
Reply
2085
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
marcdc1's Reply
I don't know about 'feeble'! I had the time to put a bit more detail into mine but they all contribute. I don't know abouot you, but I try to read all the reviews before joining a site.
|
11-07-12 01:38pm
|
Reply
2086
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
Tree Rodent's Reply
I never add the pre-checked cross-sells as a negative but I should. There is nothing positive about them, that's for sure. I have no problem with an offer that I actually have to accept, but I do wish that sites would realize how negatively they're perceived by active buyers. I've been burned a few times too...
|
11-07-12 01:34pm
|
Reply
2087
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
graymane's Reply
Thank you, sir!
|
11-07-12 01:32pm
|
Reply
2088
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
marcdc1's Reply
It may be that you were going for a different file type or resolution. I should clarify that in no cases was the entire scene missing, just the file type and resolution that I wanted. In those cases I just took a different type or resolution.
|
11-07-12 01:31pm
|
Reply
2089
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
Definitely. But even the $10 deal we usually get is a good deal too.
|
11-07-12 01:30pm
|
Reply
2090
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
slutty's Reply
Thanks for the comments slutty. With the $5 membership offer I didn't really take a big risk when I hoped to find some scenes that I'd like. I think with the standard discount offered here it is still a great deal. I suspect that I'll actually come back to the site again but not on the same frequency as I do with other repeat memberships.
|
11-06-12 08:10am
|
Review
2091
|
Naughty America
(0)
83.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Even though the network promotes itself as featuring more mature and more buxom models, there is still a lot here for those of us who like younger and more petite models
- Huge network of 27 sites
- Over 5000 scenes
- Exclusive (appears to be)
- Newer uploads (2009 onward) offer a wide range of file types and resolutions
- HD available
- Many sites updating regularly
- Bills through Epoch
- Allows download managers |
| Cons: |
- Site has a lot of ads that can slow things down
- Have to enter your username and password each time
- More dead links than I’d expect on a network like this
- Older scenes are low resolution
- Some sites no longer updating
- Proportionally fewer anal scenes than similar networks (that’s obviously very subjective and isn’t factored into the score) |
| Bottom Line: |
Like a lot of PU members probably did too, I joined this network to take advantage of the great price they were offering to commemorate uploading their 5000th scene. I had never considered joining before because much of the preview material made it clear that the site was more about buxom MILFs than the 18-22 petite stars I prefer. But with a $5 fee it was worth the risk. I know that this will be the 50th review posted here so to make this of some use to PU members who share my tastes I’ll review it from the perspective of someone preferring younger and more petite models.
The network has 27 sites up and while I realize that some readers may dispute my classification of sites, the majority of sites cater to members looking for older and more buxom models. I knew that going in and I’m not critical of that. I also won’t let that impact this review or the score.
There are some sites that focus on the young and petite. These are:
• Fast Times – 148 scenes, updating with two scenes added per month
• My Sister’s Hot Friend – 481 scenes, updating with up to eight scenes added per month
• Naughty Bookworms – 430 scenes, updating with up to eight scenes added per month
• Naughty Athletics – 137 scenes, hasn’t updated since August 2012
• I Have a Wife – 246 scenes, updating with up to four scenes added per month
• SoCal Coeds – 40 scenes, hasn’t updated since 2007
• My Dad’s Hot Girlfriend – 162 scenes, updating with up to four scenes added per month
• My Friend’s Hot Girl – 41 scenes, updating with up to three scenes added per month
• Naughty Country Girls – 22 scenes, hasn’t updated since 2009
• Naughty Rich Girls – 39 scenes, last update was January 2012
The network offers a wide variety of file types and resolutions on their newer scenes. There is really something for everyone. Mp4s are available in 1080p, 720p and 480p, WMVs are available in ‘DVD’ and ‘Normal’ and there is a Quicktime version and one for mobile devices. On all but the HD files they are also available in parts. I didn’t download all the various versions to test them, but what I did download is what it is advertised to be. The one problem with resolutions is that while they certainly offer state-of-the-art downloads now they didn’t always do that. On many older scenes the best offered is 512k which looks pretty bad. When these were being offered I’m fairly sure that they were not up to par with the best in the industry.
Streaming and photos are also available but I sampled neither so I can’t comment on those.
With the exception noted below, the network supports download managers and the links don’t appear to time-out quickly.
The site definitely has some flaws, and I realize that some of these may seem trivial but they add up to reduce the usefulness of the network. Not in any order, the flaws I found are:
• The network has no option to remember your username and password.
• If you’re on an individual site and click to open a scene, hitting your browser’s back button will kick you all the way back to page one, even if you were on page 30. Either remember where you were or use tabs. (This may not be a problem for people who don’t use IE.)
• Earlier in my membership I couldn’t use Internet Download Manager to download either of the two highest resolution files. That may be fixed now but I don’t know if it is.
• There are a lot more dead links on this network then I’ve seen with competitors.
One major flaw on the network is that it is extremely ‘busy’ with ads and feeds. Ordinarily I can overlook ads (they do work on me sometimes) because I realize it can be a decent revenue stream for exclusive networks like this but in this case they cross the line to be obtrusive. To even get into the network you have to click through two ads. Once in, the pages have a lot of ads. They’re obtrusive because they require a lot of time to download. I have a fiber op connection and on many occasions I had to wait for what seemed like a minute for the ads to load before I could navigate on the page.
I realize that this is purely subjective and many readers may not care or may see this as a plus, but for a network of this size they don’t have a lot of anal sex scenes. There were many models who are known for their anal performances who don’t do anal here. This is a subjective con, but for others it may be a plus. I’m just making the statement so that readers will know this.
So was this membership worth the heavily discounted price? Absolutely. Is it worth the usually-discounted price offered through TBP/PU? Definitely yes. Even for a guy who isn’t among the target customer group there was plenty of great porn with young and petite models to make this a worthwhile investment. I’d recommend that anyone who shares my interest in a particular type of model take the plunge regardless of the fact that the stuff we like is in the minority. There is still a lot of great stuff for us too. |
|
11-05-12 05:47pm
Replies (15)
|
Reply
2092
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
marcdc1's Comment
Interesting question… I suspect that a lot of PU members will weigh in on this one given the discount the site offered us this month.
This wasn’t a site on my radar because they seem to market themselves as being for people who like MILFs and large breasts, and that doesn’t describe my interests. But I was pleasantly surprised to see that there was a lot of material to my liking – younger, more petite models. I can’t pick a favourite, but certainly sites like My Sister’s Hot Friend, Naughty Bookworms, Naughty Athletics and SoCal Coeds made this a good value.
|
11-05-12 01:47pm
|
Reply
2093
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
slategrey's Reply
Thanks for the tip. I'll poke about in IDM and see if I can find something like you suggest.
|
10-22-12 06:00pm
|
Reply
2094
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
hodayathink's Reply
Thanks for sorting out the logo. I assume it isn't related to the fact that these are Flash files because the lowest of the Flash resolutions (480) allows IDM.
|
10-20-12 08:04am
|
Comment
2095
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
|
10-20-12 05:34am
Replies (4)
|
Reply
2096
|
Naughty America
(0)
|
Reply of
Gasperdian's Review
Great review, and like messmer I'd have to say that your review may have saved me some money. I, too, don't like fake breasts.
|
07-20-12 10:32am
|
Reply
2097
|
Naughty Midwest Girls XXX
(0)
|
Reply of
NaughtyMidwest's Reply
Thanks for your comments. Warts and all, I'm a big fan of your site. The porn is very hot!
|
09-13-16 05:39pm
|
Review
2098
|
Naughty Midwest Girls XXX
(0)
75.0
|
| Status: |
Current Member for less than 1 month (at the time of review).
|
| Pros: |
- Rare site in an underserved niche (US-based old/young)
- Has some beautiful models
- 140+ scenes
- Mostly boy/girl but does have some girl/girl
- Offers both photos and videos
- Reasonable price for the site
- Updates |
| Cons: |
- Production values are relatively low
- Wide discrepancy in the cameras used
- Updates on a bi-weekly schedule |
| Bottom Line: |
I found this to be a tough review to write because while I really like the porn that this site has to offer the site itself and the production values leave a lot to be desired. This really is a case of overlooking some flaws to get access to a niche I really like, but I’m sure we’ve all done that before.
I don’t know how I missed this site for all of these years but I’m glad I stumbled on it. Given the title I presumed it was one of the many sites that feature solo masturbation scenes or things like wet T-shirt contests. Nothing in the title indicated to me that the site offered old/young porn.
I’m sure if you are a regular porn subscriber you have also run across numerous sites like this that have an amateur feel to them. Everything about it seems amateur from the production values to the website layout. Sites like these lack the polish of the large studio-based sites. That isn’t a bad thing. My experience is that when I find an under-served niche that I like run by an amateur the sites often have some of the hottest material because the people making it share the interest as well. That seems to be the case here too.
The site does have a lot going for it in that it offers porn in the rare niche of US-based old/young porn. Most of the models here seem to be relatively unknown and most are very attractive. The male talent in most of the scenes seems to be the guy who owns the site and he is a pudgy guy who has to be in his late 50s or early 60s. Call me twisted, but something about that scenario adds a lot of heat to a scene for me.
While there is a mixture of kinds of scenes on the site most of them are boy/girl hard-core. There are some solo scenes. There are also several girl/girl scenes but most of those turn into boy/girl/girl after some lesbian action.
Many sites featuring old/young porn seem to go in for the stepdaughter theme and I realize that creeps some people out. That theme is used here but the more common theme is that of a babysitter.
Most of the scenes are shot using a combination of POV and tripod-mounted cameras. This method is never going to give the best scenes but they can work. A significant problem that this site suffers from is that one of the cameras used (usually for POV stuff) is very low resolution. It is low enough that it detracts from the overall scene.
There are currently over 140 scenes on the site. The site is updating and it shouldn’t be a surprise that the updates only happen approximately once every two weeks.
The videos are available in WMV and MP4 formats but each of those only comes in one resolution and those aren't great. The WMVs are 720x480, 1600 kb/s and 30fps. The MP4s are a bit better at 1280x720, 4000 kb/s and 30fps. One minor flaw is that the MP4 files are listed as being for the iPad so I wrongly assumed that they’d be lower resolution than the WMV files. But the thing is that SOME of them are lower resolution and some aren't. I can accept that older files are lower resolution but it would be useful to list the resolution on the file so the viewer could choose not only between the file type but the resolution as well.
Photos are available as singles or zips. Those aren't high-resolution either at 1280x960.
Initially I wasn’t able to use my download manager but I think now that may have been an isolated issue or a problem with my software because the site now allows me to use one.
This won’t be an issue for many readers, but I was a bit disappointed to not find many anal scenes at all. There are three or four and these aren't the best filmed scenes on the site.
The price for a monthly membership is pretty good and goes a long way to making up for some of the site’s shortcomings. There isn't a TBP discount but the regular monthly price is just over $20.
The bottom line for me is that this site is both easy to recommend and easy to reject – and that all depends on whether you like this niche. The site has some serious flaws: the production values aren't great and the site has an overall amateur feel to it. It lacks the quality of a bigger, better funded site. But if you like this niche those flaws can either be overlooked or they can add to the allure of the scene. So if you like this niche the site gets a strong recommendation and if you don’t like this niche you should probably spend your porn budget elsewhere. |
|
09-12-16 03:25pm
Replies (2)
|
Reply
2099
|
Nebraska Coeds
(0)
|
Reply of
Divinx's Reply
That's my experience too. The hardcore was removed for some reason. maybe a licencing issue?
|
07-24-18 01:24pm
|
Reply
2100
|
Nebraska Coeds
(0)
|
Reply of
RagingBuddhist's Review
This is a site that I've always thought of joining but never did. Based on your review I think I made the right decision. Thanks for posting this.
|
11-07-17 02:46pm
|
