I think with this site, and others in this network, potential members need to think about how long they might want to join for. If you remain a member, you get access to more and more sites in the network - most of which are high quality 21st Sextury material. That all makes the price quite reasonable.
If you're only planning on joining for one month, though, the price is going to seem quite a bit higher.
Don't you just LOVE that bait and switch crap? Doesn't it make you want to give them money so you can find out what other kind of ripoffs they have in store for you?
They may as well have a pop-up saying "We're going to take you for everything we can!"
I saw this recently with Mac & Bumble where they had a hot gallery up somewhere saying "click here for a free membership", then you had to put in your e-mail address, after which the next page said, "I'm sorry - this e-mail address is not eligible for a free membership, but we'll gladly have you as a paid member".
Needless to say, I didn't and wouldn't bite on that.
A current or past member would have to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that FTV's updates are several photo sets and several vids, isn't that correct? So even if they were updating once a week - and they've updated 3 times in the past 17 days - they would not be doing a bad rate of updates as compared to some sites.
The question really comes down to how hot you think their work is.
I've got to say, though, that I've never had a problem cancelling either through e-mail or by phone. They solve other customer service issues by phone pretty well also.
Sandra is one hard-working woman - and very responsive to her fans.
She posts at Freeones.com's message board - very cool! I don't think that I'll take the leap to this site anytime soon, though they look like they have very nice material.
So many sites deserving of attention these days - I love it!
I made it pretty clear that the "wait one month" rule was a rule that I enforced for myself and was not claiming that everyone else on this site should wait that length of time.
There are rules that I believe would help this site.
I just ran across a review for ALS Scan where the reviewer, in a later comment added to her review, said that she had not been a member prior to her review IN OVER A YEAR!!!!
That, to me, is just ridiculous, and should be grounds for that review being yanked from this site altogether.
I don't understand the point of writing a review when you haven't been a subscriber in over a year.
In my opinion, but that's just ridiculous!
I'm glad that Sarah responded with some of the significant improvements to the site in the last year.
In terms of content, I find ALS Scan to be more "genuine" than most other sites around - the footage from their most recent Caribbean trip is the best example of this - but you wouldn't have seen that since you're reviewing a site that you haven't been a member of in over a year - makes this review fairly worthless, in my opinion.
Really, given that you haven't been a member of this site in over a year - truly hard to believe to me that you think you should be writing a review given that reality - you should have just put your distaste for this site's content as a comment somewhere.
I'm glad that you included the note about Alex's response to your note to him - it shows the honesty of the people running this site - if you don't like what they're doing, just go elsewhere.
I'm sorry, but this review is just wrong! Silvia Saint has a whole large section at Suze.net. I believe that you were thrown off by their navigation, which is a LITTLE confusing - not that confusing to me, but, hey,...
If you click on Models at Suze.net, there is a message that you are looking at a Beta list that only includes the current shoots and then you have to click on "Complete List" or something like that. If you do that, and then click on "S", not only does Silvia Saint have a large section, but she's one of the featured "S" models, s well she should be.
In terms of Suze's posts, it's fairly common knowledge that Suze Randall is computer illiterate and always has been. I'm not aware of her former forum postings, but if she did them, it was definitely her daughter Holly posting for her, because Suze doesn't do ANYTHING with computers - never has. As to how much Suze is shooting these days, I really don't know - but I bet that Holly and her team would give a straight answer in their forum.
I've always considered Suze's site hit or miss, but at $10 now - their specials are all over the map in terms of pricing but all low - for both Suze.net AND Suze.video, I can't complain about this site since it continues to be updated, they have NOT purged their archives except where they have lost licensing or been begged by models that were now out of the biz to remove their shoots, they continue to make improvements, they've lowered the price to an amazing degree while still being top-rate in customer response and they are active in their forum - and very blunt.
I remember reading a post by Holly complaining about how expensive Amy Reid was to hire for boy/girl shoots, something most web-masters would be loathe to mention. Sorry, but I had to step in here to give credit where credit is due - and this site deserves credit for having a LOT of hot stuff!
I actually have a rule NOT to review a site within the first month. For myself, I just don't think it's a good amount of time to give a fair review - not to say that I consider all of the reviews done by others within the first month are unfair.
It's just that a site can have an inordinate amount of good or bad stuff posted right at the point that I join and if I'm reviewing right away, I'll be affected by that. I'm bound to give a more balanced review if I wait several weeks.
I agree with leaving reviews available to edit for a year - I think it would be a really good idea to show the before and after scores, though.
For instance: 84 on 1/07/07, 73 on 9/13/07 - with the date of the follow-up comments showing as well, similar to the way that TBP reviews work. If a site hasn't moved a reviewer to change the score within one year, the reviewer should just do a new review if they care to.
It's the difference between a professional web site that gives a damn about their members and a completely un-professional site that doesn't give a flying f about their members.
What difference does it make what the site's content is if you cannot access it after paying to do so?
Webmasters that ignore this critical piece of the business are missing the boat completely.
In my experience:
Hall of fame: Suze.net, DDF, Phil-Flash.com, ALS Scan - all responded quickly and professionally and took care of the issue with no hassle whatsoever
Hall of Shame: MyaDiamond.com (responded after weeks of hard work following them everywhere I could think of), stephanieswift.com (I had to track down the guy that designed the site to get access - I love Stephanie, but she needs someone to run her site for her), Asia Diva.com (HORRIBLE people to deal with!)
I like the girls that your photographers shoot - I think you're on the right track in working with the photographers to get the models to be more engaged and to have more fun with the shoots.
I'm sure it's challenging when you need to have a certain amount of content coming in consistently. As I said in the review, it's clear that you and the other people involved in the site care about making the site better.
It might be a matter of taste. It might also be that the guys giving the highest marks just look at the pics where the models are nude and get off on their hot bods. It also varies on the various photo sets, but the more I see, the more common I find this issue to be. When I first joined, I was pretty delighted with the new sets that had just gone up. That's why I wait at least 1 month before I do a review, to see if that first blush of enthusiasm - or disappointment, as the case may be - turns into something else over a period of weeks.
I looked at a photo set of one of their new models, Penelope, the other day and she looked engaged from the start of the set. I looked at the newest photo set of her posted and in the early pics she looks like she feels ill - not something that fills me with sexual longing, that's for sure, though she's a damned hot girl.
I asked the web-master about this - whether or not they are actually creating ANY new material for this site. He didn't respond - rarely does, in my experience, for any reason.
I don't believe that this is a "live" site. I believe that ALL of the material is recycled. They just chop the beginning of the archives when they need more.
Then there's the frequency at which the site is totally unavailable (like right now) and the un-responsiveness of their "Customer Service" - you have to scream like a freaking banshee in every forum you can possibly find to get any attention from them whatsoever.
Put it all together and it shows why my rating for this site went from 90 (back when they were updating with new material) to -10 (Beware! Beware! Beware!)
Since you took the time to respond to Drooler's sarcastic criticism, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're an honest guy that made an honest mistake coming in and giving your only(?) site review a 100. When I first joined this forum, my first desire was to review the sites that I loved the most - some held up over time, many fell WAY down in my estimation.
It's worth it to read a number of reviews here, get a sense of the format of reviews from forum members with high trust ratings to avoid repeated mistakes.
Reviews of 100 from newbies are highly suspect here - especially when more than 1 review for the same site appear at pretty much the same time - it comes off as dishonest shilling, even if it is not.
Nubiles deserves high praise, but all sites benefit from constructive criticism.
I finally got a response! Thanks - much better late than never.
I've got to say, though, that it appears that all of the "new" content is recycled. The archives keep getting to be shorter and one of the hottest sets posted this month, "Pipedream", which was posted 8/09/07, has a customer comment from 2/28/07.
Shakta, could you give some feedback on how much, if any, of Mya's site is made up of new content these days and how much is recycled?
So here's a big surprise! Even after all of this, I send an e-mail to the address specified by shakta above with the subject "Re: Problems Logging in to Mya Diamond's Site - Attn: Shakta!!" and I get no response!!!!!!
Is it any wonder that I keep saying that the people running these sites are the absolute worst on the 'net! It's absolutely vile!
I've been tempted to join this site multiple times and have been disappointed with the content both times. There are just a lot more exciting teen sites than this, including:
Nubiles - much the same terrain, but hotter content done better in every way imaginable
Met Art - young women shot beautifully - more of an arty focus than Teen Dreams, but even if you just like gorgeous young women, it's a better site by far
ALS Scan - obviously they have much more of a fetish focus (shaved, small-chested, heavy on the insertions) but their models are gorgeous, their pic and vid quality is excellent
Karups PC - they've got a lot of similar quality to Teen Dreams in a lot of ways and some of the drawbacks in navigation and outmoded site design currently (with promises of a much better site design in progress) but their content is a lot more exciting to me than TD
You reply to every single support ticket that you receive? I sent several e-mails to the e-mail address that you just gave me and have never received ANY response - including since I've been posting here about this issue - and here's what I received from your Billing Support people:
Dear Sir or Madam,
The information requested is listed below:
I tried and did not work here either. I have sent to the tech
department.
Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.
In the future, if you wish to auto administer your account information,
Protecting Minors We are strong supporters of RTA and ICRA, two of the most recognized self labeling organizations. Our site is properly labeled to assist in the protection of minors accessing inappopriate content. For information about filtering tools, check this site.
DISCLAIMER: ALL MODELS APPEARING ON THIS WEBSITE ARE 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
To report child pornography, go directly to ASACP! We're proud to be a corporate sponsor.
Have concerns or questions about porn addiction? We recommend this helpful resource.
