| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
1476
|
Chick Trick
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Completely correct, Kahn, and I thought I was clear.
I read the posted review that gave it a 50 and thought I'd check out the site. What I found as a non-subscriber was a site that appeared to be seriously out-of-date and that the low score review was likely to be spot on. The "beware" was a direct result of those observations and nothing more.
The site may be wonderful but because I didn't sign up, I really can't say. But I can say the webmaster for that site has done a lousy job promoting it and, apparently, chooses not to provide any support to paying customers of the site, based on the reviewer's comments.
Low odds that they'll see any of my money. ;-)
|
10-30-07 08:37am
|
Reply
1477
|
Chick Trick
(0)
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Exactly.
My comment followed a 50 point review of this site by another member who reported that the site support function was totally non responsive to his calls for help. He also said that the content updates stopped a long time ago. That's why I checked out the tour for myself just to see what this site looked like. It reminded me of my early searches back in the early 2000's both in the quality of the videos and the nature of the content.
I've seen similar thematic approaches (phony scam perpetrated on supposedly innocent and unsuspecting babes), but all of them were two or more years ago. The tour is intended to get the user to spring for a subscription, so if it's a crappy tour, why should I expect the real thing to be any better?
|
10-28-07 04:10pm
|
Reply
1478
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Denner's Poll
When I found TBP a few years back, my first reaction was that it was just another a site sponsored by the industry intended to promote the sites that paid for the endorsements.
However when I found negative and tepid commentary on sites where I had similar issues I started to pay closer attention to TBP. Now, when I discover a new site on a surf, I won't even think about signing up before I see what TBP has to say. If the site is not in TBP, I conclude that the site is too new or so flakey to waste money on.
I will not pay for a site until I've fully reat all there is about the site on TBP and on the PU forum.
On the other hand, I do check the reviews on TBP and posted by members and have found sites that I like and have signed up for.
|
10-28-07 03:30am
|
Reply
1479
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Jay G's Poll
I admit to a weakness that started when porn was limited to magazines and black and white stag smokers on 8mm film. (Yes, I'm that old! I even attended a strip show by my all time favorite, Candy Barr.)
If I like a video I save it. If I like a pornstar I want everything available with that pornstar in it.
Result is that I have over 1.5 Tb of external hard drives that, cumulatively, are about 60% full (closing in on 1.0 Tb). I have watched, perhaps, 50% of the stuff. Normally I'll delete about 50% of what I download and watch so it won't be long before I'll max out.
I agree with DivBZero. Selectivity is the key. One of these days...
|
10-22-07 10:55am
|
Reply
1480
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I don't really see the point in just keeping them in a zip file. The space requirement is about the same and the objective is to check them out, not to just collect them.
|
10-18-07 08:11am
|
Reply
1481
|
Ed Powers
(0)
|
Reply of
jd1961's Reply
Wow! jd, you nailed it. Before Internet porn developed to where it is today, Ed Powers seemed to get a whole lot of undeserved shelf space in the video stores and always did a lousy job on his vids...but he seemed to stay on top.
I really learned`to dislike that smelly looking scumbag but thought it was just me. Glad to see I'm not alone.
|
10-14-07 10:11pm
|
Reply
1482
|
Reality Kings
(0)
|
Reply of
Lews Therin's Comment
I agree that PU should have a new category to rate customer service and support, especially with a site problem like this one.
This site should get no new business from PU and TBP users unless and until it fixes its customer service function.
(Danni.com has the same problem, a non-responsive customer service function.) Bummer when you spend good money and can't get access or any support function to respond.
One suggestion. If the biller is CCBill, you can call them for help in contacting a site's customer support function.
|
10-14-07 02:19pm
|
Reply
1483
|
N/A
|
Reply of
cblodg's Poll
The forum on Babelicious is interesting and monitored by the webmaster who is quick to reply to comments, suggestions and concerns. However their sister sites have a separate forum that is very inactive and gets no attention at all from management when posts appear.
The only other site I've signed up for with anything resembling a forum is VideoBox with their "reviews" of both a full video and of individual scenes. The "reviews" are really more like a running commentary on the site.
IMHO, forums are useful but not essential to an otherwise good site.
|
10-14-07 02:11pm
|
Reply
1484
|
LSG Models
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
Denner,
Sorry to hear that. So far the P U commentary suggested that this was a good site with an interest in high standards, including their business practics. Their pricing in sensible and their samples are efective. (I plan to try LSG after I've checked out FTV throroughly and have written a comprehensive review.)
The noton that you can pull a stunt like that suggests that the webmaster doesn't expect to maintain any loyalty even with the discounted price for renewing members.
I suspect that our friends in the business will discover how lousy practices like this really are. The old story in business is, if you make one customer happy, one person knows. If you make one person unhappy, five people know. If you make one person REALLY unhappy 25 people know.
Add to that if you piss off a P U member enough, it may result in "hasta la vista, baby" for the site itself.
|
10-13-07 01:06pm
|
Reply
1485
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
While it's a PITA, it's also way overdone, in my opinion. If someone successfully accesses a site with a difficult UserID/Password combo, then what's the point in requiring repeated entries of the same UserID/Password...unless there's a known security hole in the site's access control protocol.
However, in network sites where access can be direct or via a network link, it makes sense to require reentry of a UserID/Password.
My answer, then, is that if it's a hot site that I enjoy, the access protocols are annoyances but do not alter my feeling about continuing as a member. If it's a borderline site, I'll probably drop out anyway regardless of the access controls employed.
|
10-05-07 11:36am
|
Reply
1486
|
VideoBox
(0)
|
Reply of
apoctom's Reply
Spend a few minutes going through the archives and it won't be just your head that will be big. I find old Woody gets very active whenever I go to the lineup on my favorite porn ladies.
|
10-02-07 07:35pm
|
Reply
1487
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I seem to match everyone else.
Back in the late 80's and early 90's there was the modified porn stuff on cable TV (no straight penetration shots, just the action with genitalia blocked by body parts or fussed out) that got my attention, but my VCR was my primary access to porn (rental stores).
Since the quality and diversity of internet porn has increased over the last 4 years has caused my DVD library to join the video tape library in the attic gathering dust.
|
10-02-07 06:31pm
|
Reply
1488
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
Websites exist to make money. That means they need need enough subscribers to cover costs and make a good profit.
A site that runs short of models can still do well with good marketing if it has a decent level of content. A stagnant site will lose subscribers, but it also saves a bunch on content costs.
|
09-24-07 01:00am
|
Reply
1489
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Rick's Reply
Rick, I feel sorry (not!) for the poor bastards with the lousy ripoff sites. You guys are really making life quite miserable for the low-enders and are rewarding the guys who work hard at putting together the great sites.
Nothing like "sunlight" to make the rats scurry. Great work.
|
09-21-07 06:17pm
|
Reply
1490
|
DDF Busty
(0)
|
Reply of
sullivan's Review
Just checked the site and there is no mention of any videos, just image sets.
TBP says there are 550+ 10 minute clips. Does each and every model have a video clip?
|
09-20-07 06:41pm
|
Reply
1491
|
Wicked Pictures
(0)
|
Reply of
VetteFreak's Review
Thanks, VF. The super price and the large number of pornstars almost had me signing up. Your review saved me money because I have no interet if I can't d/l the videos...and I also hate the no name nonsense.
Looks like these guys don't really care.
|
09-20-07 06:27pm
|
Reply
1492
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Rick's Poll
I found it yesterday and wondered why I hadn't seen it earlier. Now I know. It's new.
And it's great! I must have spent an hour just looking through all the features.
As I've said before, TBP is, in my opinion, the Consumers Reports of Porn Sites. And it gets better every day.
|
09-20-07 08:05am
|
Reply
1493
|
Danni.com
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Reply
For what it's worth, the recent site redesign was nicely done, but there are many other sites that are better managed than Danni.com.
In 2004 the site was outstanding but really went to Hell in the late summer of 2005. It's better today but not even close to its heyday.
If you want a trouble free experience I suggest you try another site. If they return to a reasonably responsive customer support function, fix the plethora of broken links, and install a functioning search function (it's been there for more than 3 years but it doesn't work), they may be returning to being in the top 10 porn sites.
|
09-18-07 06:52pm
|
Reply
1494
|
Busty Adventures
(0)
|
Reply of
Monahan's Review
Just reporting in. I signed up for one more month and the site navigation has been improved.
With one update per week I had no problem grabbing all the new stuff I wanted to keep in the 4 weeks I was a returning member.
Suggest no more than 2 sign-ups per year...not enough new stuff to sign-up more frequently.
|
09-18-07 06:46pm
|
Reply
1495
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Poll
I did that way back in 2004 with Danni.com when the site was superbly managed and had state of the art technical features. The 3 month price was good and I couldn't see myself letting the membership expire.
A lot has happened since then; Danni "retired," the support staff became non-responsive and the DRM made all archived stuff unavailable.
I signed up again for a month and found a site that is still in a sad state of repair. The multi-price is still available, but who would want to sign up for more than one month?
|
09-18-07 05:44pm
|
Reply
1496
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Drooler's Poll
As was discussed in the last poll about trial offers, the number of quality websites is growing rapidly. The webmaster of the site that is really good will do all it can to show the prospective member why he should sign up on his site. That includes a solid preview with samples as well as reasonable pricing.
As Jay G says, I no longer bother with sites that do a lousy job on previews because the message is like people looking for work; if you can't write a decent resume that sells yourself, you won't do any better on the job.
|
09-18-07 08:39am
|
Reply
1497
|
N/A
|
Reply of
Khan's Reply
Yes, Kahn, that's a consideration.
But if a site can be "raided" ("drained" of its content) in a 48-72 hour period, it's way too light on content and is likely to have very few renewals.
Sites with light content, such as single model sites, can address the issue by establishing download limits on trial users, such as 2 Gb per 24 hours or such. That way the trial member can still check out the content but can't keep it.
IMO, the most effective way for GOOD sites to attract and retain members is to offer a brief trial (2 days) with full access but with a download limit, followed by a full price month (say, $30) followed by a second month, if continuous, for $25.
Alternatively a high priced trial (say $10 for 3 days) that applies the trial payment against the first month so that the price for a full month would be an additional $20 would be effective.
BTW, high quality sites like FTV, Ox Pass and All Internal, to name a few, that have large numbers of "trailers" in their free tours provide effective "limited trials" for free.
The competition is getting better and the number of sites is getting larger by the day so sites need better and more imaginitive front end strategies just to stay even.
|
09-17-07 10:32pm
|
Reply
1498
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
PinkPanther's Reply
I agree 100%. See my reply to Drooler.
The previews show me that the site content has exactly what I like and that there's a ton of content that I have to look forward to, so the periodicity of updates really isn't much of an issue. It becomes one only after I run out of currently available content, which looks like it won't be happening soon.
|
09-17-07 08:56am
|
Reply
1499
|
Danni.com
(0)
|
Reply of
exotics4me's Comment
No, Danni's is no Twistys. Twistys has a good mix of hardcore and softcore and has a good structured interface and high quality. No hardcore on Danni but the girls do get down and dirty with each other occasionally.
The present Danni's tries too hard to be the 2007 version of the very successful formula it had in the early 2000's when it was the porn site.
Today it's got some great content but it also has way too much chatty cathy stuff (long, vapid interviews with fully clothed girls) and it tries to get artsy fartsy with sof focus and slow motion.
The worst part is that a large percentage of its archival material is disabled or just missing. Links don't work, strange error messages pop up, etc.
The current site is in need of serious adult supervision.
Please note - The site was recently overhauled completely so that it is now a mess to find anything.
An updated TBP review would be great!
|
09-16-07 07:45am
|
Reply
1500
|
FTV Girls
(0)
|
Reply of
Drooler's Reply
Great point, Drooler.
The marketing of porn sites, of course, focuses on "membership" for a longer period. In fact if they offered a discounted renewal rate ($30 to start and $20 or $25 to continue past the first month, that might make a difference.
In any case, you're right. Even if there were no updates at all the $30 investment to access the archives looks like a good one.
|
09-16-07 07:06am
|
